ReportWire

Tag: City Council

  • Cleveland City Council Targets Illegal Street Takeovers With New Legislation

    Cleveland City Council Targets Illegal Street Takeovers With New Legislation

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    CPD

    Surveillance video from a street takeover on West 25th and Lorain on September 18.

    Last Saturday, from 11:30 p.m. to 4 in the morning, hundreds of young adults from Columbus and Cincinnati drove to Cleveland in souped-up vehicles to deliver what can only be described as a citywide taunt.

    Dozens of cars in at least 15 intersections spun in circles around filming teenagers or lit fires. Masked kids banged on party buses on I-90, while others hung out of passenger doors. Some even flashed pistols; others shot airsoft guns at police.

    Cleveland police held an emergency Sunday press conference. Chief of Police Dorothy Todd appeared before Council’s Safety Committee to update them on a new task force to address the issue and to recount what measures, most unsuccessful, were undertaken the night of the takeovers.

    On Monday, Council took its own steps. Three councilmembers—Michael Polensek, Blaine Griffin and Kerry McCormack—introduced legislation that would outright ban every plausible aspect of the street takeover, what’s been the nom du jour of what occurred last weekend.

    One of the dozen images Cleveland Police released last week of the street takeover suspects. - CPD

    CPD

    One of the dozen images Cleveland Police released last week of the street takeover suspects.

    Mirroring tougher laws that will go into effect statewide on October 24, the new amendments add and include punishments for just about anything a street takeover perpetrator could commit: burnouts, doughnuts, drifting, wheelies, stunt driving. All for, the amendment reads, “the immediate preservation of the public peace, property, health or safety.”

    Most importantly the new rules could mean anyone involved, from the filmers to the drivers, could be found guilty of at least a misdemeanor of the first degree. Which means license suspension anywhere from 30 days to three years. The new law would also allow police to take takeover-related car parts as “contraband”—wheels, tires, mufflers.

    “No person shall participate in street racing, stunt driving, or street takeover upon any public road, street or highway,” the introduced legislation says, “or on private property that is open to the general public.”

    Street takeovers, a dangerous merging of social media attention grabbing and aggro car culture, have gotten national media attention this year after a wave of interceptions in several American cities were shut down. Cop cars were lit aflame in Philadelphia; a girl was killed after a street takeover in Los Angeles.

    Cleveland Police reported three warrants for arrests after the mass takeovers on September 28. Later last week, they followed up by releasing a dozen photos of teens mid-takeover, and asked for the public’s help in identifying them. (Many wear ski masks or animal masks under the belief, and cry of, “No face, no case.”)

    click to enlarge Cleveland Police Chief Dorothy Todd tried to calm an irate City Council last week miffed about the dozen incidents of street takeovers in Cleveland in late September. - Mark Oprea

    Mark Oprea

    Cleveland Police Chief Dorothy Todd tried to calm an irate City Council last week miffed about the dozen incidents of street takeovers in Cleveland in late September.

    One arrest, made by the Ohio State Highway Patrol, hasn’t yet been confirmed as a street takeover suspect. No other suspects have been taken into custody.

    Last week, Councilman Michael Polensek, the head of Council’s Safety Committee, asked Todd to explain what went wrong during and after Saturday’s takeover. Todd responded with a series of mea culpas and pleas for empathy.

    “Every action or inaction taken by police will always be judged, not only by their superiors, by the media, by the community,” she said. “And we have to answer to the Department of Justice [Consent Decree] monitors, to the Cleveland Police Commission—and even city councils.”

    Todd and Safety Director Wayne Drummond told Council that it was looking into deploying a half dozen drones, along with possibly implementing spike strips and installing metal plates at intersections, to make drifting impossible.

    Regardless, Council wasn’t moved.

    “This behavior is unacceptable and has put our citizens, visitors and businesses at risk,” Griffin said in a statement Tuesday. “The morale of the city has been shaken. We want action and that’s why we’re are taking this important step. We have to hold people accountable.”

    Subscribe to Cleveland Scene newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    [ad_2]

    Mark Oprea

    Source link

  • West Sacramento City Council candidate says child stole campaign yard sign

    West Sacramento City Council candidate says child stole campaign yard sign

    [ad_1]

    Surveillance video shows the moment when someone, who appears to be a child, gets out of a car and steals a political yard sign from someone’s lawn. It happened Friday afternoon in the Brodderick Bryte neighborhood in West Sacramento. The sign was for Emiliano Rosas. He’s a candidate for West Sacramento City Council’s District One seat. “My initial reaction was it was disheartening,” Rosas said. “Given what’s going on in national politics right now, I think it’s unfortunate to see kind of the discord and the vitriol that is going on. That has no place here in Sacramento.”In what is his first campaign for an elected position, he hopes this is a one-off moment and that it can be used to teach a lesson.”Not every little kid knows that it’s a crime, you know, or something that they are going to be doing is a crime,” Rosas said. “I think it definitely is a moment to learn from and to show other people and other kids that it’s not okay to do that.”Rosas’ campaign manager confirmed the homeowner didn’t file a police report for the theft, but he did get a new sign for his yard.As the campaign season ramps up ahead of November, Rosas said he expects more yard signs to be going up. He hopes people learn to leave them alone.Rosas is running against current West Sacramento City Council member Norma Alcala. KCRA 3 reached out to her campaign for a comment on the theft. We haven’t heard back yet.

    Surveillance video shows the moment when someone, who appears to be a child, gets out of a car and steals a political yard sign from someone’s lawn. It happened Friday afternoon in the Brodderick Bryte neighborhood in West Sacramento.

    The sign was for Emiliano Rosas. He’s a candidate for West Sacramento City Council’s District One seat.

    “My initial reaction was it was disheartening,” Rosas said. “Given what’s going on in national politics right now, I think it’s unfortunate to see kind of the discord and the vitriol that is going on. That has no place here in Sacramento.”

    In what is his first campaign for an elected position, he hopes this is a one-off moment and that it can be used to teach a lesson.

    “Not every little kid knows that it’s a crime, you know, or something that they are going to be doing is a crime,” Rosas said. “I think it definitely is a moment to learn from and to show other people and other kids that it’s not okay to do that.”

    Rosas’ campaign manager confirmed the homeowner didn’t file a police report for the theft, but he did get a new sign for his yard.

    As the campaign season ramps up ahead of November, Rosas said he expects more yard signs to be going up. He hopes people learn to leave them alone.

    Rosas is running against current West Sacramento City Council member Norma Alcala. KCRA 3 reached out to her campaign for a comment on the theft. We haven’t heard back yet.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mayor Karen Bass vetoes ballot proposal to let police chief fire problem officers

    Mayor Karen Bass vetoes ballot proposal to let police chief fire problem officers

    [ad_1]

    Mayor Karen Bass has vetoed a proposed ballot measure to rework the disciplinary process at the Los Angeles Police Department — a step that could result in its removal from the Nov. 5 ballot.

    In her veto letter to the City Council, Bass said the proposal, which would have allowed the police chief to fire officers accused of committing serious misconduct, “risks creating bureaucratic confusion” within the LAPD.

    Bass said the proposal, which also would have reworked the composition of the department’s three-member disciplinary panels, provided “ambiguous direction” and “gaps in guidance.”

    “I look forward to working with each of you to do a thorough and comprehensive review with officers, the department, and other stakeholders to ensure fairness for all,” she wrote. “The current system remains until this collaborative review is complete and can be placed before the voters.”

    Bass issued her veto during the council’s summer recess, when meetings are canceled for three weeks. The deadline for reworking the language of the ballot proposal has already passed, City Clerk Holly Wolcott said.

    “If the council does not override the veto or take any action, the measure will be pulled from the ballot,” Wolcott said in an email.

    The council’s next meeting is scheduled for July 30. Whether it can muster 10 votes to override the mayor’s veto is unclear.

    By issuing the veto, Bass effectively sided with top LAPD brass, who warned last month that the proposal would create a two-tier disciplinary system, with some offenses resulting in termination by the chief and others heading to a disciplinary panel known as a Board of Rights.

    The mayor’s appointees on the Board of Police Commissioners also criticized the ballot proposal, saying they felt excluded from the deliberations. At least one commissioner voiced concern about the proposal’s creation of a binding arbitration process to resolve cases where an officer files an appeal of his or her termination.

    Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez expressed similar worries, arguing that binding arbitration would lead to more lenient outcomes for officers accused of serious wrongdoing. Soto-Martínez, who voted against the proposal last month, had also argued that the range of offenses that would lead to termination by the police chief was too narrow.

    An aide to Soto-Martínez said Tuesday that his boss supports the veto.

    Councilmember Tim McOsker, who spearheaded the ballot proposal, said he is “deeply disappointed” with the mayor’s action, arguing that it threatens the most significant reform of the LAPD’s disciplinary system in more than two decades.

    If the council fails to override the veto, the next opportunity for major reform would not occur until the 2026 election, McOsker said.

    “What this veto would do is put us back in the status quo for at least two years,” he said in an interview.

    McOsker said he is still looking at the options for responding to the mayor’s veto. During the council’s deliberations last month, four council members — Soto-Martínez, Nithya Raman, Eunisses Hernandez and Curren Price — backed a proposal to seek additional changes to the ballot measure.

    Soto-Martínez took aim at the decision to let a police chief fire officers for some offenses but not others, saying it would create “ambiguity” in the disciplinary system.

    That proposal was defeated on a 9 to 4 vote. Had it passed, it would have effectively killed the ballot measure for this year’s election, since the deadline had passed for making extensive changes.

    The proposal vetoed by Bass had been billed as a way to undo some of changes brought by Charter Amendment C, a ballot measure approved by voters in 2017, which paved the way for all-civilian disciplinary panels at the LAPD.

    The ballot proposal would have reworked the system, ensuring that each panel would have have two civilian members and one commanding officer.

    Representatives of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, which represents about 8,800 rank-and-file officers, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

    Last month, the union issued a statement saying the ballot proposal struck “the right balance” on disciplinary issues, ensuring that officers who are terminated by a chief have access to an appeal process with binding arbitration.

    [ad_2]

    David Zahniser, Libor Jany

    Source link

  • As Cleveland City Council Begins Redistricting, Concerns About Ward Boundaries and Representation Rise

    As Cleveland City Council Begins Redistricting, Concerns About Ward Boundaries and Representation Rise

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Mark Oprea

    Council President Blaine Griffin in Council Chambers last year. Griffin will be overseeing a redrawing of Cleveland’s warn boundaries to be wrapped up in December.

    Ward 8 Councilman Michael Polensek recalls 2013 with a slight distaste in his mouth.

    It was a year the city’s then 19 wards were set to be chiseled down to 17. Cleveland was still losing population, and then Council President Martin Sweeney had to follow a charter amendment passed five years before that required boundaries to be redrawn every decade with the number of seats tied to how many people lived in Cleveland. In 2013, that meant two politicians would lose their jobs.

    The result was some high octane in-fighting and crosstalk bickering. Jay Westbrook, the veteran council member who backed the 2008 charter law with enthusiasm, opted to retire to “stand up for the change I sought and let someone else pick up the torch.”

    Sweeney, accused of influencing the redraw of the wards map to back then Councilman Eugene Miller—who was, at the time, embroiled in a DUI scandal—found himself in a similar pickle as Westbrook. He was thus accused of imbalancing the Black and Hispanic neighborhoods he had supposedly promised to help.

    In 2013, Sweeney stepped down from his role, the Plain Dealer reported, to “set the whole record straight on the whole redistricting thing.”

    “He’s a sore loser,” Polensek said at the time. “He lost at what he tried to do. And now it’s nothing but bitterness.”

    Eleven years later, Council is six months away from another relook at Cleveland’s ward boundaries. With the help of the same consultants who drew the map a decade ago, it will decide how certain neighborhoods should be represented by elected officials. And eleven years later, as those hired guns begin interviewing its members, Council is again approaching the inevitable with feelings of dread in their back pockets.

    Especially those who recall 2013.

    “I told [the consultants] don’t mess up, don’t screw up my neighborhood again,” Polensek told Scene on Monday.

    “You have an opportunity to correct the mistakes that were made, the terrible lines that were drawn,” he said. “To disenfranchise east side and neighborhoods of color in the ethnic neighborhoods. That’s what they did.”

    Hired by City Hall three times to re-analyze its ward boundaries—in 1981, 2009 and 2013—the consultant team, led by 85-year-old analyst Bob Dykes at Triad Research Group, will have yet another opporunity to more carefully match Cleveland’s changing population numbers and neighborhoods with fairer, more accurate representation.

    All while doing its best to steer clear of gerrymandering claims. Some on Council in 2013 accused Sweeney of splintering Ward 14’s Hispanic population, curtailing it from 41 to 37 percent, until a successful pushback kept it more substantive. (A move that would undeniably help Councilwoman Jasmin Santana, the ward’s first Latina leader, secure her seat in 2017.)

    “Two of our primary goals are to have natural boundaries and keep neighborhoods together. Community involvement will also play a key role in redistricting,” Council President Blaine Griffin wrote in a press release. “We are eager to begin the work now to allow us time to get this right—and deliver maps that accurately reflect the needs of Cleveland’s diverse neighborhoods.” (Griffin was out of the office Monday and unavailable to comment for this article.)

    As will go the process, Dykes and his team of three, including architect Kent Whitley and former Cleveland State professor Mark Stalling, will have six months to hand over a redrawn map to Griffin. Council will vote on the revision. All minding that two of them, whomever they may be, will either lose their jobs or have to run for election in a different, newly created ward.

    That’s created a tiny panic in those who both trust their constituents yet find next year’s election too vague to pin down.

    “I don’t know what district I’m running. I don’t know what my ward number is going to be,” Ward 13 Councilman Kris Harsh told Scene. “I don’t know what my boundary is going to be. And I haven’t got any indications about what they might be. So I’m kind of waiting to see the map like everybody else.”

    click to enlarge Kris Harsh in 2023. - Mark Oprea

    Mark Oprea

    Kris Harsh in 2023.

    Next week, on July 11, Harsh said he’s hosting his first fundraiser in his council tenure, both as a bid to raise thousands of dollars before next June and to preempt what could be an eventual political threat. In early June, City Council doubled the limit that individuals and political action committees could contribute.

    Like Polensek, Harsh had his concerns that the new map could tilt neighborhoods’ identities, thus leading to a possible drop in what’s an already low voter turnout for council races.

    Calls to Dykes and Whitney were not returned on Monday. Salling said that his team vowed to “honor those boundaries” that Polensek claimed were rocked by 2013’s redistricting—namely the Black east side wards. He said the trio was committed to following the Voting Rights Act, the 1965 federal law passed to prevent, to the best of its ability, the disenfranchisement of minority communities.

    Regardless, Salling was blunt about the inevitable. Two fewer wards meant two fewer councilpeople. Two fewer councilpeople carried a world of implications—more campaign dollars needed to run elsewhere, changed dynamic in Council Chambers and the unavoidable sting when one’s job is threatened.

    “You know, somebody’s going to lose,” Salling said. “Hopefully it’s somebody that doesn’t really mind losing or that obviously maybe doesn’t carry the popular vote as strongly as other council people. But, you know, that, that’s sort of out of my domain.”

    Subscribe to Cleveland Scene newsletters.

    Follow us: Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter

    [ad_2]

    Mark Oprea

    Source link

  • At Recent Panel, Sports Stadium Financing Experts Warn Against Massive Public Subsidies for Cleveland Browns

    At Recent Panel, Sports Stadium Financing Experts Warn Against Massive Public Subsidies for Cleveland Browns

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Mark Oprea

    Ward 16 Councilman Brian Kazy (far right) fixed together a panel of stadium politics experts—Ken Silliman, Victor Matheson and Brad Humphreys.

    If you were to pick out any average Browns fan or Northeast Ohioan off the street, you’d probably get a mixed bag of answers to what’s become an increasingly controversial question: What should come of Cleveland Browns Stadium?

    Let the Haslams relocate to Brook Park with a $2-billion dome (with half coming from the taxpayers of Ohio, Cuyahoga County and other sources). Focus on renovating the current one to the tune of $1 billion (again, with the Haslams asking for half the tab to be picked up by the public). Forego costly renovations and instead do the best we can with the current stadium?

    Last Thursday afternoon at the Cleveland Public Library a panel of experts on stadium builds and sports politics gathered for two hours to discuss the hard facts and real-world implications of those possibilities.

    The panel—comprised of Ward 16 Councilman Brian Kazy, former Law Director Ken Silliman, and stadium economics experts Brad Humphreys and Victor Matheson— offered lots of opinions and facts but one seemed to come with agreement: That erecting a $2.4 billion Brook Park dome and surrounding village, saying goodbye to the lakefront, would not carry the perks to Clevelanders some have been touting.

    Namely, Cleveland plus Domed Stadium equals Wealthier City.

    “There’s zero evidence in 30 years of peer-reviewed academic research that a professional sports team in a city generates any substantial jobs, raises wages, raises income, raises property taxes,” Humphreys, an economics professors at the University of Alberta, said.

    “What professional sports are good at,” he added, “is moving economic activity around to different parts of the city.”

    With Browns owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam’s stadium lease with the city to end in 2028, time is closing in on a decision that’s divided Clevelanders, just as it seemed to divide attendees at Thursday’s panel: Ask for public dollars to bankroll a projected $1.2 billion upgrade of Cleveland Browns Stadium where it is, or use (more) public dollars to construct a $2.4 billion football neighborhood 14 miles south in Brook Park, across from the airport and where the old Ford plant once stood.

    The Haslams have been vague on their intentions after it was announced, in April, they secured the rights to buy 176 acres of land east of I-71 big enough for a ballpark village to stand. The move, seen by Thursday’s panelists as a chess ploy, has nevertheless prodded local politicians, from Mayor Justin Bibb to Councilman Kazy, to ensure that Cleveland doesn’t lose—with some PTSD—the Browns to a southwest suburb. (Bibb has said his preference is for the Browns to stay downtown, and has argued the city has put forth what, is in their opinion, a good deal for the city and the team).)

    It’s what seemed to beckon Kazy, who was the face of Council’s emphasis of the 1996 Art Modell Law that attempts to protect cities from billionaires seeking to pick up their team and leave, to gather three experts on stadium deals to espouse the starry-eyed Clevelander’s wish for a shiny new domed megapalace. Like Nissan Stadium in Nashville. Or Jerry’s World in Dallas. Or Los Angeles’ behemoth that is AT&T Stadium.

    click to enlarge Matheson (right) brought hard data to back up the panel's bottom line: expensive sports facilities are bad public investments for a city in general. - Mark Oprea

    Mark Oprea

    Matheson (right) brought hard data to back up the panel’s bottom line: expensive sports facilities are bad public investments for a city in general.

    Sensing some in the crowd yearned for a Taylor Swift-level echelon of concerts, or say another Rolling Stones stopover, Matheson was quick to shut down the perception of huge change with some hard data. From 2002 to 2022, he and Humphreys found, Cleveland Browns Stadium hosted 12 concerts. Detroit’s dome hosted 38. Indianapolis’ Lucas Oil Stadium, 31. (And two Super Bowls, in 2006 and 2012.)

    The bottom line for the two visiting professors, who speak regularly against city-subsidized stadium deals, was evident: the billions of dollars that go into inviting a Swiftie World Tour doesn’t produce a sound return in investment. They quoted a Chicago economist: “It would be better to drop [money] from a helicopter than invest it in a new ballpark.”

    “So if you said, ‘Well, look. There’s so much more you can do with an indoor stadium,” Matheson said. “Well, yeah: one more concert [a year] here. You might get a men’s basketball Final Four. And a Super Bowl—but you’ll get one.”

    For Silliman, the former chair of the Gateway Economic Development Co. who recently published a 600-page memoir-slash-stadium exposé on Cleveland’s own chaotic history with sports stadiums, the more sensible route was to convince the Haslams, the city and its denizens to reframe Cleveland Browns Stadium in the historical vein of Fenway Park in Boston, or Wrigley Field in Chicago.

    Which meant, he said, doubling that dollar stream Cuyahoga County residents have been using for stadium upkeep since 1990. The tax on booze and cigarettes. The tax on concerts and shows. The tax on parking lots and car rentals.

    “You know, our sin tax has never been adjusted for inflation,” Silliman, who was an adviser to former Mayor Mike White in the 1990s, said. “If you were to double the annual amount available for each sports facility that would take it from $4.5 million per facility, to about $9 million.”

    Silliman, like Kazy himself, reminded everyone in attendance that he was first and foremost a Cleveland sports traditionalist.

    And believed that, in reality, most Clevelanders had more practical priorities than the Haslam Brook Park renderings. (Only five percent of members of the Cuyahoga County Progressive Caucus thought the public wanted to or should pay for a new stadium in the first place.)

    “If you ask the average ticket buyer at Cleveland Brown Stadium,” Silliman said, cracking a smile, “they would say, just give us a team that’s consistently competing for the playoffs.”

    Subscribe to Cleveland Scene newsletters.

    Follow us: Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter

    [ad_2]

    Mark Oprea

    Source link

  • Racist rhetoric disrupts two Black students’ comments during council

    Racist rhetoric disrupts two Black students’ comments during council

    [ad_1]

    Denver’s City Council chambers. Feb. 24, 2023.

    Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

    Two Black elementary school students were subjected to hateful and racist rhetoric during City Council’s general public comment session on Monday by an unknown Zoom attendee.

    The two young girls from Monarch Montessori in Montbello were asking City Council members for help in procuring a yurt for their school when an unknown person on Zoom interrupted the meeting and told the girls to “go back to Africa.” The person continued spewing more insults and racist slurs for about 30 seconds while City Council members could be heard asking moderators to step in and mute the person.

    The person was eventually ejected from the video call.

    Several councilmembers went down to the podium to stand behind the students and console them.

    The older student was visibly upset and unable to continue giving her speech. She was led from the room by Councilmember Shontel Lewis.

    The younger student continued their plea for the yurt that would create more space for students. The student said the school has experienced an influx of students and in order to accommodate everyone, the yurt would be transformed into a music room. The current music class will then be converted into a regular classroom.

    After the student finished, Council President Jamie Torres condemned the unknown person’s actions.

    “I want to extend an apology,” Torres said. “I want to thank you for being here first and foremost and for sharing your commentary. I want to apologize for what we heard and I want you know…that everyone in this room is a support system and we would never acknowledge or authorize that kind of language in this chamber.”

    In a statement, Torres added the “words were vile, as was the character of a person who would actively seek to say these words to two beautiful and courageous young girls.”

    “Speaking at the Denver City Council brings nervousness to adults every week, and these youth gathered the bravery to bring their voices to their City Council representatives to improve their school and community. We honor and praise these two young voices and condemn anyone who would attack them and any other member of our community,” Torres wrote.

    Robert Austin, the council’s spokesperson, said the Technology Services team is currently investigating how the person was able to speak during the meeting. Typically, an event producer runs the meeting and unmutes people when it is their turn to speak. Austin said the producer tried several times to mute the person before ejecting them from the meeting.

    Austin said the team has also not been able to identify the speaker. Their IP address shows as being from the Netherlands, which Austin said the team suspects isn’t accurate.

    Austin said the primary concern is to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

    After the meeting, Austin said several councilmembers and Council’s Executive Director Bonita Roznos spoke with the girls about the incident.

    Austin said he’s not sure what council will do regarding the students’ request “but efficiency and decreasing wait times in the permitting process has been something the council has asked of the administration in a variety of forums.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Will a child care center at Denver’s airport take off?

    Will a child care center at Denver’s airport take off?

    [ad_1]

    Denver airport leaders are considering building a child care center — maybe more than one — to help recruit and retain employees at the growing airport campus.

    To further study the concept, the airport hopes to win City Council approval Monday for a 3-year, $800,000 contract with a Denver advocacy group that will assist with research and planning. A council committee already approved the proposal on April 10.

    The airport’s plan reflects the reality that child care — or the lack thereof — can have big economic consequences for employers that rely on working parents to fill their ranks. More than 40,000 employees, ranging from aviation officials to janitorial staff, work at the airport, which is the country’s third busiest. There are so few state-licensed child care options near the airport in far northeast Denver, it’s considered a child care desert.

    Airport officials say they have many questions to answer before committing to a child care center or some other form of employee child care support, but suggested their eventual decision could be momentous.

    “We’re on a global stage and we have the ability to do something really special,” said Andrea Albo, deputy chief of staff for Denver International Airport, which is owned and operated by the city.

    She said project leaders will carefully consider the needs of the airport’s lowest wage earners and historically marginalized communities in deciding how to proceed. A final decision is likely by the spring of 2026.

    Nicole Riehl, president and CEO of Executives Partnering to Invest in Children, the group being considered for the $800,000 contract, said employers aren’t a panacea for child care challenges but can help build up child care supply.

    “Employers can’t just sit around and wait for the federal government to fix it or the states to fix it,” she said.

    Other U.S. airports offer child care

    If the Denver airport moves forward with a child care center, it will join a handful of other American airports that already offer on-campus child care, or soon will, including Los Angeles International Airport, Pittsburgh International Airport, and, starting in 2025, Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport.

    Sky Harbor’s child care efforts were born during the pandemic, said Matt Heil, the airport’s deputy aviation director for strategy, policy, and administration.

    “We had nowhere near the traffic, but we still had to have all the operations up and running,” he said. “It was a priority to make sure we could continue to do what we could to support workers.”

    The Phoenix City Council agreed to use $5 million in federal COVID relief money to help fund a two-pronged approach to child care help.

    Starting in 2022, Sky Harbor launched sliding scale child care scholarships for employees who earn up to 400% of the federal poverty guidelines — $124,800 for a family of four. About 40 households currently receive the scholarships, which can be used at child care facilities across Maricopa County, Heil said.

    The other half of the plan is a soon-to-be-built child care center for up to 100 children on the airport campus. It’s slated to open in 2025.

    Placing a child care center at an airport is complicated, Heil said. It needs to be accessible and convenient for employees, while having enough separation from the terminal that long lines, tight security, and abandoned-suitcase incidents won’t jeopardize its operations.

    In addition, space is limited on Sky Harbor’s campus in southeast Phoenix. Officials there settled on a site in a courtyard under a Sky Train station near an employee parking lot.

    Heil said helping parents with small children secure child care can incentivize them to work at the airport.

    “If you talk to other airports, this is definitely an ongoing conversation in the industry,” he said.

    How big a role should employers play in child care?

    When Stephanie Burke moved to Denver two years ago to start as director of the airport’s Center of Equity and Excellence in Aviation, she struggled to find child care for her two boys, then 11 months old and 3 years old.

    She found a spot for her 3-year-old son, but nothing for the baby, so her husband stopped working for 11 months and stayed home with him. At that point, they found a neighbor who was willing to watch him until they found a permanent spot.

    “My story is not unique,” said Burke, who is helping lead the airport’s child care effort. “It’s something that we hear from other employees … the wait lists are really long, you have to get on before you even think about having a child or when you’re in your early pregnancy.”

    Burke said there are plenty of anecdotal stories, but the airport still needs to collect concrete data on employee needs. About 19,000 of the more than 40,000 employees at the airport fall into the 20- to 39-year-old age group, but it’s not clear how many have young children and need child care. That’s part of what the work with Executives Partnering to Invest in Children, or EPIC, will reveal.

    Elliot Haspel, senior fellow at Capita, a child and family policy think tank, said the airport’s plan to study the issue makes sense and praised EPIC as a thought leader on employer-based child care.

    But he also sounded a note of caution about the trend of employers launching child care programs — and the growing use of public dollars in the form of tax incentives or grants to help fund such projects. He worries that using those dollars on child care linked to a parent’s job may take away from broader public investment in a child care system that serves everyone.

    “For employers writ large, we need to ask them to pay into a universal system via taxation,” he said.

    In recent years, there has been a flurry of legislation to encourage employer-based child care, including a 2022 federal law that will allow semiconductor manufacturers who receive federal subsidies to use some of those dollars for child care programs.

    “Employers can start to feel like a solution to child care problems, and they are not,” he said. They are “one piece of a larger puzzle.”

    Ann Schimke is a senior reporter at Chalkbeat, covering early childhood issues and early literacy. Contact Ann at [email protected].

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Eastpointe agrees to unique settlement after ex-mayor’s public meeting outburst

    Eastpointe agrees to unique settlement after ex-mayor’s public meeting outburst

    [ad_1]

    click to enlarge

    Courtesy of Mary Hall-Rayford

    Mary Hall-Rayford is one of four plaintiffs who filed a lawsuit against Eastpointe Mayor Monique Owens.

    A group of First Amendment attorneys reached a unique and powerful settlement with the city of Eastpointe after its then-mayor shouted at residents and refused to let them speak during a public meeting in September 2022.

    As part of the lawsuit settlement, the city agreed to designate Sept. 6, the day that Eastpointe Mayor Monique Owens shouted down residents, as “First Amendment Day.”

    On Tuesday, the council also voted to apologize to the residents — Mary Hall-Rayford, Karen Beltz, Karen Mouradjian, and Cindy Federle — and entered into a consent decree prohibiting the city from enforcing unconstitutional limitations on the public criticizing elected officials.

    Each of the plaintiffs also received $17,910 in addition to attorneys’ fees.

    The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in November 2022, alleging the mayor violated the First and Fourteenth Amendment rights of four residents who tried to criticize Owens at a public meeting.

    “The First Amendment protects every American’s right to criticize government officials,” FIRE attorney Conor Fitzpatrick tells Metro Times. “With this settlement, Eastpointers can have confidence their voices will be heard and local governments can be left with no doubt there are serious consequences for violating the First Amendment.”

    click to enlarge Ex-Eastpointe Mayor Monique Owens. - City of Eastpointe

    City of Eastpointe

    Ex-Eastpointe Mayor Monique Owens.

    The first-term mayor, who was later convicted of fraudulently applying for a $10,000 COVID-19 grant, prevented residents from speaking during the September 2022 meeting, insisting they had no right to criticize her. As the meeting descended into chaos, with Owens berating a resident for explaining the First Amendment, the council’s four other elected members walked out of the meeting and didn’t return.

    It wasn’t the first time Owens prevented residents from criticizing her during the council’s public comment period. According to the lawsuit, Owens frequently used her authority “to suppress dissent and criticism by interrupting and shouting down members of the public who criticize her or raise subjects she finds personally embarrassing.”

    Owens, the city’s youngest and first Black mayor, ran for reelection last year but didn’t collect enough votes during the primary election to advance to the November general election.

    Former Councilman Michael Klinefelt is now the mayor of Eastpointe.

    Fitzpatrick says the settlement is a victory for free speech rights everywhere in America.

    “Regular Americans should feel comfortable going to their local government or school board meeting and make their views heard,” Fitzpatrick says. “This is what American democracy is about. There are some countries where you can be put in jail for criticizing a public official or asking the wrong question. Luckily that is not the case in the United States of America, and the U.S. Constitution makes sure that is not the case.”

    At the September 2022 meeting, residents were questioning Owens’s actions after she alleged that Councilman Harvey Curley, who is in his 80s, assaulted her by yelling and putting his hands in her face during the open ceremony for Cruisin’ Gratiot in June 2022. Owens was trying to speak at the event, but Curley was opposed, explaining that he didn’t want to politicize the event since it was operated by a nonprofit.

    The Macomb County Sheriff’s Office dismissed the case, and the Macomb County Circuit Court denied Owens’s request for a personal protective order.

    Hall-Rayford, a community activist, school board member, and former chaplain, was the first to speak at the September meeting, but she didn’t get far.

    “I’m going to stop you right there,” Owens said as soon as Hall-Rayford began to speak. “We’re going to stop the council meeting because I’m not going to let you speak on something that has to do with police.”

    City attorney Richard S. Albright informed Owens that she didn’t have the right to prevent a resident from speaking.

    As part of the lawsuit in December 2022, the city agreed to prohibit Owens from interrupting or shutting down speakers during public comment periods.

    [ad_2]

    Steve Neavling

    Source link

  • Housing voucher lawsuit: Adams admin wants case tossed, saying it has authority to refuse expanding program | amNewYork

    Housing voucher lawsuit: Adams admin wants case tossed, saying it has authority to refuse expanding program | amNewYork

    [ad_1]

    Advocates and City Council members rally in support of passing legislation to expand CityFHEPS program in summer 2023. The city filed its legal response to a lawsuit by the Legal Aid Society seeking to force it to implement the laws after it has refused to do so. Wednesday, March 27, 2024.

    Photo: Gerardo Romo / NYC Council Media Unit