Thursday, December 9, 2010

The Recall of the Mayor of Portsmouth, Ohio

"The votes are in and it's out with the old, in with the new -- with all 19 precincts reporting, voters in Portsmouth overwhelmingly decided to recall Mayor Jane Murray. The final vote: 63 percent voted for the recall -- 36 percent voted to keep Mayor Murray in office. Voter turnout for this special election was 26 percent." (WSAZ News, November 7 2010)


Along with initiatives like fixed election dates and voter-initiated referenda, recall legislation is an attempt to give ordinary citizens more power.  The simple act of voting every four or five years may not be enough of an effective mechanism for genuine citizen engagement. Citizens deserve effective tools to use in order to hold politicians accountable. In Portsmouth, Ohio, the voters determined Jane Murray needed to be relieved of office. Proper steps for recall were taken by committee; the election was held; and the mayor was recalled.

A recall does just that - it gives the populace a democratic process for ending an officeholder's term before more extensive damage may occur. Equally important, a recall gives an officeholder's supporters an opportunity to show overwhelming support for continued initiatives. A recall is not, as some would call it, a "one-sided affair." The recall gives both sides an equal opportunity to demonstrate their case for continued contractual public service.

The process of recall is not a pleasant exercise for anyone involved. Informed people realize its serious consequences. Negativity on the part of both sides surfaces as people understand the gravity of their vote. Inevitably, the past and the present actions of a recalled official take center stage in the minds of the voters while promises of a better future rest in the balance. 

Recall is a stinging reminder for those who hold office that their constituencies hold tremendous judgmental power at their discretion. By most accounts, good politicians should have nothing to fear from the implementation.  If they are doing their job in representing their constituents well, theoretically recall will never be initiated. But, the balance of power must always remain with the people, and recall ultimately strengthens the will of one person as an all-important voice with a single vote. Recall is direct, human-level democracy.

Some might say the smaller number of voters in many recall elections makes the outcome less representative. To counter that, people need only to view the real motivations for casting a ballot in any election, general or special. Indifference and general lack of involvement are negative traits of an American citizen unacceptable to those who carry hopes for progress and positive change. If people do not vote in a critical recall, they should not complain about the results. In brief, these people have chosen to shirk one of their democratic obligations.

New mayor David Malone and Portsmouth City Council is now faced with a tremendous challenge. The people have spoken at the polls, and now, city government must respond to their concerns with new, united determination and vigor. Instead of making the new year a continuation of past disagreements, they must make it a totally new beginning. The opportunity for improvement is great, but now the citizens look to the leadership of the city for action. 

Oliver Cromwell said, "Not only strike while the iron is hot, but make it hot by striking." This quote is appropriate in the present situation. Timely movement, not stagnation, is the key to improving Portsmouth and its government. Council is well advised to heal any open sores and proceed with cooperation and unity. Above all, council should remember that all people contribute to the lifeblood of the community.

As equals, city workers can return to their chosen fields of expertise and support others as teammates in these trying times. No one likes to feel threatened in their environment or feel forced to endure undue hardships. All people have strengths that must be nurtured to full development. Indeed, all have shortcomings that require sensitive attention. If those in control do not wish to offer common courtesy to all, the city loses. If lies lead to injustice, the city loses. And, if people desire power instead of the common good, the city dies.

I supported the recall of Mayor Jane Murray. I am not ashamed or sorry for lending my support to this effort. I understand that controversy is sure to follow the vote. People will argue that the recall was unneeded as well as a waste of time and money. But, when an important election draws 3,123 votes (26% participation), the vast majority of eligible voters in the city did not care to express their concern. How can the populace gripe about the outcome of the recall? I believe the city required the change. I cast my single vote to validate my view.

I sincerely hope Mayor Malone can help mend fences and establish new, effective order. Some people will surely nitpick his decisions and cite the recall as a scapegoat for all fault, so he must be prepared to face such criticism. The city council serves the people, yet many Portsmouth residents expect complete discord as the order of the day. This ridiculous mentality has pervaded the area for so long that many buy stock in the "Good Ole Boys" theory of subversive control. What a shame to denigrate the system that struggles to serve.

Granted, city government must open doors and seek new blood for the sake of needed reform and renewal; however, despite its problems, Portsmouth is living testimony to the determination of the Appalachian spirit. Many strong-willed, educated individuals have dedicated themselves to the betterment of the area. They understand the epidemic of drugs, the criminal element, and the lack of employment that thwart almost all new positive development. Still, many residents do not yet know that Ohio, even the nation, views Scioto County as an area that continually fights as a model of activism and determination in the face of overwhelming problems.

The worst enemy of the average citizen in Portsmouth may be reflected in his/her mirror. I am not trying to upset anyone with this comment. Sometimes the truth is so simple that it is easily overlooked. A simple exercise of self inspection may be beneficial for the young and old.You may ask yourself these few questions about your contributions to the present pervasive attitudes pertaining to the city limits.

1. Do I insist on living in a Portsmouth of the past, disdaining most reality?
2. Am I guilty of spreading nothing but negative attitudes about Portsmouth?
3. Do I actively contribute to building any positive image about Portsmouth?
4. Am I a person who believes nothing can improve in Portsmouth?

No one expects miracles with the recall, but council should give immediate attention to major issues. When the team works for possible solutions together, workers' expectations run high and all involved feel they are critical to all successes. Just as important, those who labor for progress need proper support and equal consideration. And, efforts to unite the wards and build better relations with city employees should help.

As people contribute their constructive ideas, they expect to be privileged to answers, not just questions and tabled agendas. Anyone with an active share in success will help raise negative images while working harder. Attaining important goals that strengthen the very foundations of Portsmouth must become exercises involving common, compromised decisions that require everyone to sacrifice purely personal agendas. In essence, leaders must slip on the shoes of an enormously varied population, tread their streets, open their ears, and respond.

I wish all of the elected officials good luck. I know their challenges are great. I honestly hope my vote for the recall restores confidence in Portsmouth, in city government, and in the will of the citizens. Council, please forge new alliances that make a difference. Our elected officials are the following:    

      Mayor of Portsmouth - David Malone

  • First Ward - Kevin Johnson 
  • Second Ward - To Be Decided
  • Third Ward - Nicholas Basham 
  • Fourth Ward - Jerrold Albrecht
  • Fifth Ward - John Haas
  • Sixth Ward - Richard Noel

25 comments:

Sue Davis said...

Hi Frank...when I lived in Portsmouth our 4th Ward councilman was Jerrold Albrecht. No neighborhood meetings no door to door to introduce himself nothing to indicate he had the 4th Ward in his best interest. So when and how do our council folks work for us and express our concerns and, do they really care about pushing Portsmouth forward? This is why I moved, just like others...Sick of the same old same old excuse. Leave Portsmouth alone or if you don't like it, get out, well I got out!

d bailey said...

Albrecht's number is in the book. Did you ever call him? Did you ever go to a city council meeting?

Albrecht is not the problem. Attitudes like yours are.

Danny

Frank Thompson said...

Danny, I've gone to City Council meetings and I have met the mayor. Before I made my mind up to vote for the recall, I talked to many city workers and others who are affected by the administration. I don't like recalls, but I am certain I have done a service for myself and for many by supporting the issue. I understand people have differences but, in this case, I feel justified. This is my first political activity for recall.

Jerry Holt said...

Frank--I just wanted to say that you wrote a very fine, thoughtful piece. Thanks--It's getting harder and harder to read good writing, and yours is pretty damn good.

Jerry Holt

Anonymous said...

It is reassuring to know that there is someone writing commentary about Portsmouth that rises above the childish namecalling and conspiracy theories advanced by certain individuals. I have lived in Portsmouth for most of my life, and have never understood the negativity freely offered up by so many people who live here ("Floodwall Tech", everyone is corrupt, the city is dying, "there's nothing to do here", etc. etc. ad infinitum). Please keep up the good work.

rob said...

if there was a vote to recall mayor jane murray, how was david malone made mayor? was there a vote or was he appointed? sorry if the question seems unintelligent.just curious.

Anonymous said...

According to our city Charter, if there is a recall or death or some reason the current mayor cannot fullfill their term. the council president is appointed Mayor. Mr. Malone was the council president.

Anonymous said...

Think Tank,
It's a shame you haven't been to more meetings and since I have attended most of them I know you have only attended a few. There are many problems there and one of them is that the majority of 4 rules. We would be much better off if the count was 3 to 3. They would have to consider compromise. This would be a much better mix and I think more would actually be accomplished.

d bailey said...

Frank--

I didn't mean your attitude was the problem. I was referring to the attitude of a person who would leave town because their council person did not "go door to door to introduce himself" or "hold neighborhood meetings." Mr. Albrecht is in his 60s. He gets paid $50 a month to do his job. Last time he ran he saved the city from the only other candidate on the ballot for his ward: Wayne Nichols. I urge you to read this article;

http://p-townunderground.blogspot.com/2009/12/on-fourth-day-of-grinchmas.html

Mr. Albrecht is a good man who does a good job on City Council. He deserves a medal, not cheapshots from someone who just wants to gripe.

Thank you.

Danny

Anonymous said...

Frank,

A good written article but in my opinion, you're not fully informed with the real problem of city government. I'm not saying the recall wasn't just. What I am saying is, the mayor's position as it is in this city, is a weak mayor. Sure, they are the chief administrator but as has been displayed in many instances, not just during Mayor Murray's term in office, the mayor's power and direction can be easily blocked and diverted. I am of the opinion the true problem rests with council and an auditor who does not completely follow the laws of not only the charter but that of the Ohio Revised Code. If you do not believe me then attend more city council meetings. Observe how business is conducted. Read and research the charter. Read and learn the Ohio Revised Code as it pertains to the city. Read the latest audit of the city and look at the many violations our auditor continues to make over and over. Council makes the laws of this town and is also responsible for spending of monies. The auditor is to sign off on all money to be spent prior to passage assuring the money is or is expected to be there before it is to be approved by council for spending. This he fails to do most of the time. If you are going to step into the political arena and write about it, the least you can do is become informed about what you are writing about. Failure to do that makes you no better than an overwhelming majority of the people of this town which is perhaps the biggest problem of it all, an un or mis-informed citizen. I hate to say this about my fellow citizens but the truth is the truth. If they do not attend council meetings then how are they being informed other than by way of the media or from a fellow neighbor or friend which likely is basing their opinion on that of the very same source, a fellow neighbor or friend, or a biased media. When you look at how many years this town has been in decline, you would think more people would be inclined to become involved in getting to the root of the problem to turn it around but sadly many are like an ostrich and would rather bury their head and hope it goes away.

Anonymous said...

I have to agree with Danny. Anytime I have had a problem, I call Mr. Albrecht and he has always helped me. Mr. Albrecht should be judged by the good work he does, not by how many doors he knocks on at election time. If that is how you judge whether or not your councilman in effective or not, then all you are going to get is a professional politician who only cares about getting votes. Mr. Albrecht is not a professional politician, instead he is someone who cares about people.

Sam

Anonymous said...

Frank you need to do some investigating before you say they only get 50 dollars a month. Council members voted themselves full health insurance, which by the way is costing thousands a month to taxpayers. Some of them have doubled claimed health problems which by city insurance is legal. What I'm saying they had 2 insurance carriers and one paid the bill and the other was turned in to the city insurance which paid the client cash. Now if you think this is far fetched like I said do some checking on your own. I'll help you where to start if your really interested.

Frank Thompson said...

I didn't say a word about salary for city council members. I have no idea what they receive. I am a concerned citizen and not a person who wants to "open new cans of worms." To accuse me of being misinformed is a little unfair. After all, I am calling for people to work together and make compromises. Why must everyone be so critical of other people's ideas? The entire theme of my entry was to underscore the need the cooperation and a new attitude toward the future.

Matt said...

I guess I look at this whole political transaction from a "buyer beware" perspective. Tom Bihl, the prime mover in the mayoral recall initiative, has a pretty shady past as Portsmouth's Police Chief and City Auditor. Shady money deals, graft and a colorful driving record leading to abuse of power allegations number among his highlights as a public trustee. Stay tuned to see what sweatheart deal is coming to him as a result. The voters of Portsmouth may have traded a stubborn, ineffective but honest mayor for more of the same backroom dealing that's been the norm for the last four decades.

d bailey said...

To vagabond:

What makes you think Tom Bihl is 'shady'?

As is typical, when Jane Murray's supporters couldn't defend her actions in the last few months they spread a lot of lies about those who they saw as her enemies. It is a very common tactic that they use to intimidate anyone from taking a stand on certain issues. They typically accuse those they disagree with of being Klan sympathizers, homosexuals, drunks, etc. Just because you read something on the internet doesn't make it true.

And as the election results proved the issue was Murray herself (who is not an honest person) not Tom Bihl, who is just a man who exercised his rights as a citizen.

Danny

Matt said...

@danny, Tom Bihl's public record leaves no doubt as to his less than above board behavior as a public servant. It's all there for anyone to see in the public archives. I'm not claiming Murray was an effective Mayor, but there are no records indicating that she has been indicted for misuse of public funds, covered up personal misconduct or violated the city charter by funding initiatives that there was no money to pay for in the budget. Tom Bihl can't say the same. Don't believe me? You don't have to take my word for it. Look through the city records.

d bailey said...

Vagabond, First of all, Bihl spent his entire career in service to Portsmouth. I've never seen anything in "the public record" that makes me believe he was "less than above board," as you claim.

And no matter what you claim he did, he still had every right to call for a vote on Murray's performance as mayor.

Tom Bihl DID NOT recall Jane Murray. The citizens of Portsmouth DID. And pretty overwhelmingly. Bihl just pointed out that the "Empress had no clothes."

Matt said...

@Danny, if you're not seeing anything in the public record casting doubt of the veracity of Bihl's efforts for the citizens of Portsmouth, then you've chosen not to look. Indictments for misuse of public funds, reckless operation of a vehicle while the city Police Chief, allegations of abuse of power in connection with that reckless operation charge, shady accounting practices while the city auditor, using his position as auditor to pay himself $15,000 for his unused police vacation days with no oversight from other city offices, it's all there. These are not spurious claims, they are verifiable facts. You can keep your head in the sand and deny these facts all you want, it doesn't make them any less true.

My original post did not state the Bihl was responsible for the recall, but I did state he was the prime mover. He started the petition and stuck with it through three separate court challenges. Again, we're talking verifiable fact. I also never claimed that Murray was a particularly effective Mayor, or make any arguments as to whether or not she deserved recall.

What I DID say, was that the good citizens of Portsmouth should beware of the situation they have bought for themselves. My guess (based on Bihl's verifiable past actions) is that he wasn't acting out of some altruistic civic concern, but rather for his own interest or gain. My advice was to watch out for the eventual reward Mr. Bihl may reap for his hard work. It may be more than Portsmouth voters are willing to pay.

d bailey said...

Thank God that someone had the guts to stand up for Portsmouth. Obviously, based on the results (63% for the recall) the citizens agreed that it needed to be done. Thank you, Mr. Bihl, for your service to our town adna job well done.

Unfortunately, Mr. Bihl's reward for doing so and for an entire career in public service to Portsmouth, is to have know-it-alls like Mr. Vagabond and the CAVE People make smarmy accusations about his character.

When Tom Bihl was Police Chief he had a single accident in a city vehicle and was cited for it. Of course, certain citizens went wild with unproven allegations which Mr. Vagabond repeats here as fact.

When he was City Auditor, a position to which he was appointed to fill out the term of the previous auditor (again, thank you for your service to our city, Mr. Bihl) his office paid a bill for a repair to his personal vehicle. As I remember, he said the bill had been lying on his desk and it was processed by accident, and he reimbursed the City. He was indicted by the County Prosecutor, who dropped all charges after an investigation.

Ask any policeman or fireman. When they retire they get paid for unused sick days and vacation days. Sometimes it can amount to $50,000 or more. For Mr. Vagabond to claim that Bihl "used his position as auditor to pay himself $15,000 for his unused police vacation days with no oversight from other city offices," is just a lie that he is repeating as fact.

Finally Vagabond's spiteful accusation that Bihl was acting out of personal interest or gain, with absolutely no evidence, is just pathetic. Attitudes like his are why no reputable person wants to run for office in Portsmouth. That's why we end up with Kroger clerks and nut cases like Murray. What sane, qualfied person wants to take the abuse? Mr. Bihl deserves our thanks.

Vagabond. Don't be a CAVE Person. Step into the light.

Anonymous said...

It's all predetermined that Terry Ockerman will take the second ward seat this post is 12/18/10 now lets see who's right.

d bailey said...

Terry's a good guy. I hope he is appointed.

Anonymous said...

Terry is know to be a Florida pain clinic owner and another pill pusher coming to P Town' Welcome just what we need

d bailey said...

"Terry is know to be a Florida pain clinic owner and another pill pusher coming to P Town' Welcome just what we need"

I see the CAVE PEople are already starting their crap...starting and spreading stupid anonymous rumors on the internet.

Anonymous said...

the other anonymous proved he is clueless.

Larri said...

d bailey, thank you for acknowleging that Terry is a good guy. I have known Terry for 48 years...becuase he is my cousin. He is from a very good family of which some live in Florida after retiring. Terry DOES NOT, own a pain pill clinic, whoever the CAVEMAN is, has no idea what he is talking about. It sounds like this person is a jelous person for all that Terry has acomplished.