Tim Gorbach: Making so much sense

THE ISSUE  of offering family rates to a gay married couple  at the Cuyahoga Falls Natatorium can now be hung in Tea Party Mayor Don Robart's office as one of his less distinguished deeds however his surrogates choose to define it.  But the record would not be complete without inserting a definitive  appeal  from another official for passage before a Republican majority defeated it with the mayor''s best wishes.

In supporting a family rate for the couple ( which included a wounded Iraqi veteran) , Tim  Gorbach, the Democratic chairman of the Parks and Recreation Board, addressed the financial cost of changing the rate structure and just as importantly, the inequality of conflicting rates between the Natatorium and Water Works, which has a more liberal policy.

To questions  raised by the discount's opponents, Gorbach said the Natatorium's annual revenue would be reduced by $49,000  - or 1 pct. of the annual budget. As of the end of April, he reported, the Natatorium had net savings of more than $100,000.

"Without reducing any services, we have already more than doubled the amount necessary to account for the projected shortfall, he told the Board.

He  said he was "very uncomfortable" with the conflicting rate structures of the two entities under the Parks board, calling the Natatorium's "discriminatory."   "I think as a board we should be moving at the speed of light to  correct this dichotomy and remove much discriminatory nuances in our Natatorium rate structure as possible.'"

He then struck on a significant element that shaped the issue:   "I   feel  very strongly that we need to apply our discount opportunities more evenly for our membership.  We tout in   all of our literature how we are family friendly.  In fact, our motto  is 'whole fitness for the whole family.'  Well,  I believe we are coming  up short in our discount plan options for this to be true."

I would add that considering the minuscule effect on the budget that so concerned the mayor and Republican board members, you had to look for underlying motives to rejecting the request of  a same-sex married couple.

I  know the Republican majority ignored the board chairman's  plea and for the foreseeable future the issue is dead.  But it is refreshing to hear a public official in the Falls making so much sense on a matter that was so symbolic for a community's openness to today's social landscape.  And for that reason alone,  I've posted this report.

Same-sex marriage: No kayakers at Falls City Hall

Cuyahoga Falls to tear down two dams next year; kayakers eager to tackle rapids unseen in 200 years  - Beacon Journal headline, December 11, 2011

Unfortunately, there aren't enough public  officials  in the Falls who are eager to tackle more meaningful  matters unseen in 200 years.

I refer to the defeat of a initiative to award a same-sex married couple a family rate at the Natatorium, a modest discount for the spouses, one of whom - if you can imagine that!  -  is a wounded Iraqi veteran
who was prepared to have his head shot off so that the Natatorium and other venues around America could live in peace.

The controversy  has plodded forward for months in what has become Republican Mayor Don Robart's Tea Party Central town somewhere just north of Akron.   It would have passed 6-5 on City Council , with all six Democrats supporting it.  But when the Mayor was heard to threaten a veto, it would have needed 8 votes to override his veto.  There was no hope of siphoning  two from the Republican side.

Tim Gorbach, the Democratic chairman of the Parks and Recreation Board, which oversees the Natatorium, tried various methods to create a compromise that would allow the couple to get the family rate.  But again, when the board met on Thursday, it was was defeated, 3-2, by the Republican majority opposing it.

I talked to two of the opponents on the board, Dick Sebastian and Debbie Ritzinger, both of whom insisted that neither  religion nor the mayor influenced their decisions, although both seemed less eager to preclude the mayor. They agreed that it was all about the money  the city would lose by extending the family rate to a same-sex couple.  But if they were a straight-sex couple, wouldn't the same cost factor apply at the family rate?  Would somebody please do the math for me?

Before your reach for you calculator, allow me to put it this way:  The only difference in the rates ($130 annually) was that one couple was gay.

In his haste to circle his own wagon, Robart first said the state's ban on same-sex marriages prevented the Falls from allowing the discount.  When his own law director said the discount would not be a problem under state law - Akron and Medina, for example would not prohibit equal rates - the mayor then switched to the cost factor.  But I wonder about that, particularly when he nearly soared off the stage at a recent Tea Party rally by praising the Teabaggers as the  "social, fiscal and moral conscience of America." Really,  Mayor?

There is further irony here in that the Falls is revving up for a bicentennial celebration in which there will be a lot of chest-pounding about the  whitewater beauties of the town's history.    Here's what the bicentennial commission has to say about it:

"The mission of the Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio Bicentennial celebration is to promote awareness to our rich heritage, encourage citizens and business leaders to plan, participate and sponsor events and activities, recognizing 200 years of the history and growth of  Cuyahoga Falls.

In view of the dismally regressive mentality at City Hall on the Natatorium , wouldn't it be more appropriate to call it a Centennial celebration instead and wait for the mayor's successor to bring the town forward to the 21st Century?  

Obama the clear winner over North Carolina

CIRCLE THIS HISTORIC week on the calendar for your grandchildren.  It uniquely demonstrated the wide gulf separating those committed to expressing individual liberty in their personal lives, and those who express their liberty as the preferred way to determine the choices of others.

At one end of the spectrum was the overwhelming passage of a constitutional amendment in North Carolina banning same-sex marriage and civil unions. (Curiously, they were already outlawed  in the state).   Their rationale was their need to lock into the state constitution "godly values," as they were described by some supporters.  Taking no chances, their campaign even brought out the 93-year-old Rev. Billy Graham, who said he  was greatly concerned by "moral decline in our country"  and that the Bible was "clear" on the intent of the amendment.

But at the other end of the arc, President Obama, risking political backlash in an election year,  rose to the moment and declared his support of same-sex marriages. His right-wing critics at Fox News and elsewhere  quickly condemned his move as a political stunt rather than  a deliberative act of faith.

I have news for  them: There are more convenient stunts  to impress unsuspecting voters.  From the standpoint of moral affirmation of a free society, I would grade the two widely conflicting events as  Obama...1,  and North Carolina... zero.

It is, after all, 2012.

The Tea Party will be back in the Falls to clutter the debate

TODAY'S NOTICE is to alert you about another political revival in Cuyahoga Falls on April 15. Not by coincidence, it has been scheduled by Tea Partyers on the Christian Sabbath to ululate about the burden of government and taxes - the precise deadline for you and me to have paid up our share of America's overhead. I should tell you right off that I'm not enthralled by taxes, either. But being a reasonably good citizen, I know of no other way to pay for a lot of things that we would not want to do without. Nor do the Teabaggers, for that matter. So they take the cheapest way out by wailing about the overhead while driving to rallies on roads that we all, of necessity, must pay for, or by calling the cops on the slightest fear of the mysterious light on the next block. Emergency health care, even for someone who might pass out at one of these events? Don't get me started.

For this group, the Falls is becoming the preferred Garden of Eden for indignant right-wingers, like Myrtle Beach is for Ohio golfers. There have been previous Tea Party congregations there, and not an election passes that people like Rick Santorum doesn't show up on the Riverfront Mall to preach his final sermon before losing the Republican primary the next day. One of the reasons, I suspect is that Don Robert, Summit county Republican chairman Alex Arshinkoff's favorite mayor, presides over the city's political and spiritual agenda much of the time, completing the exercise with Arshinkoff, who serves as the tail wagging the tail.

For this year's tax day, the Republican headliners will be Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel, who slipped into the U.S. Senate race with a warehouse full of money before the big guys in Columbus could find somebody more likely to win; State Sen. Frank LaRose, who cast the deciding vote (after indicating that he wouldn't) to pass Senate Bill 5, which restricted collective bargaining and was destroyed in a referendum; and U.S. Rep. Jim Renacci, one of four congressmen who has a piece of Summit County following shameful GOP redistricting.

All would probably tell you that they are not really Tea Partyers, but this is an election year, so the safe thing to do is to attend these events to whip up the crowd by endorsing what Tea Partyers stand for. My ancestors had a clever way of innocently fending off such criticism. "Shou baddi aamel" - What am I supposed to do?"

A couple of things that don't make a helluva lot of sense to me: These anti-government blowhards are all on the government payroll with perks that you wouldn't believe. They also will be appearing on the Riverfront mall at the Pavilion, a convenient stage that was enabled by Federal tax money. (They didn't tell you that?)

Still more hypocritical is the fact that LaRose and Mandel are Iraqi vets who will be appearing to make hay in a town where the mayor would be expected to veto any move by City Council to give a same-sex marriage couple family rates at the Natatorium. Robart's position is even more repugnant in the fact that one of the spouses is a wounded Iraqi veteran. I doubt there will be a single word about this on April 15.

The issue isn't dead. Councilwoman Diana Colavecchio, a Democrat, says the six Democrats on council shares her belief that there should be equitable rates for all Natatorium members, but faced with a a threat of a veto she would fail to reach the 8-vote threshold to override Robart since the five Republican council members are siding with the mayor. One even expressed fear that otherwise he was afraid it would trouble some people, biblically.

On April 12, the matter goes back to the parks board with a possible opening. Both Colavecchio and board chairman Tim Gorbach, a Democrat, say they have dicovered a contradiction between two of the operations that the Board oversees- the Natatorium and Water Works Park. The latter has nothing in its rules denying a discount to same-sex couples but the Natatorium does. "It will take some time," says Gorbach, a Democrat who supports the couple's request, "but we'll have to find a way to reconcile the two to grant the discount."

That's the kind of leadership by him and Colavecchio lacking at City Hall, where religion and politics collide to enfeeble the idea of equality..

The next step in Cuyahoga Falls Natatorium issue

The Cuyahoga Falls city administration's silly denial of family rates at the Natatorium to a same-sex married couple will be tested in City Council. Councilwoman Diana Colavcchio emailed the following response to question I had asked about the issue's future:

We [Democratic caucus] will be forming the ad hoc committee, without the

necessity of an ordinance. Next Monday, the committee will be announced,

along with a meeting schedule. I will chair it. I expect the meetings to

be held on Mondays, immediately after council, for convenience purposes.

The committee will analyze data and make a recommendation back to council.

(It's good to know that someone is paying attention in the Falls to common decency for everyone and not one segment of the public!...AZ)

Cuyahoga Falls: A friendly host to Santorum

WEEKEND ORTS:

I see that McRick Santorum will be speaking in Cuyahoga Falls Monday night. The suburb is becoming Republican Mayor Don Robart's petting zoo for GOP presidential candidates in the closing days of Ohio's elections. It was a campaign motorcade stop for President George W. Bush, when he was seeking reelection in 2004. Among other things, he charged his Democratic opponent, Sen. John Kerry, with wanting to expand the "power and scope" of government. It played well to his hosts, including those with powerful ties to politics and government. Indeed, county party chairman Alex Arshinkoff didn't hesitate to biblically describe the election as a "contest between good and evil." You know the rest of the story.

* * * * *

I again caught a glimpse of McRick Santorum roaring that "faith has been driven out of the public square" - which is puzzling since everything he says about faith is televised to the public square every moment of the day. I am even more baffled by the empty charge in a country with 500 religious radio and TV programs in a billion-dollar industry run by conservative religious groups. Among them: Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network and Regent University; and Jerry Falwell Ministries, now operated by the late Moral Majority leader's two sons. These two mammoth operations alone account for more than $700 million in revenue, according to a report by Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Hmmm...

* * * * *

More and more states and cities are rising to an understanding of what true democratic rights are all about in a free society. So it was good to read a Beacon Journal report this morning that Akron Mayor Don Plusquellic, Canton Mayor William Healy II and Stow Mayor Sara Drew have signed a national Freedom to Marry resolution supporting same-sex marriage. They will doubtless hear from critics , but so what? Unlike the Republican pols who race around the country demanding that government get off the backs of individuals while also invading the very same personal lives, the mayors have qualified for the new enlightenment that says to Big Brother: Mind your own business in how we want to present ourselves at the altar.

Bad days for GOP in Indiana and Cuyahoga Falls

WHAT A COINCIDENCE! While Republicans in Ohio and other states are eagerly trying to rig voting laws to crush un-rampant "voter fraud", they really didn't need Charlie White, Indiana's secretary of state, to mess up the Republican brand of honesty and decency. On the other hand, he does prove that fraudulent votes are a living issue, at least at the highest levels of state government.

White, you may have heard, has just been convicted on six felonies: three for voter fraud, two for perjury and one for theft. And wouldn't you know that when he campaigned for secretary of state in 2010 he described "election integrity" as a major issue and reassured the voters thusly: "Charlie will protect and defend Indiana's Voter ID to ensure our elections are fair and protect the most basic and precious right and responsibility of our our democracy - voting."

That noble claim has since been removed from his website.

Back in Ohio, where fraud has been determined to be virtually non-existent, the GOP lawmakers are continuing their fraudulent quest to deny many voters, as Charlie White once described it, their "most basic and precious right." (Voters that the GOP has profiled as Democrats.) They are said to be hopeful of offering a revised restrictive law before...yep...the November presidential election. The Plain Dealer has quoted our own Republican secretary of state, Jon Husted, as saying he wants the current voting law - a newer version that was downright political porn - to be repealed to avoid "voter confusion".

Sorry, Jon, but nobody seems to be more confused about voting rights than the lawmakers on your side.

* * * * *

The way things are going at City Hall in Cuyahoga Falls, Mayor Don Robart may yet have to concede we are living in 2012. His unyielding denial to a request by a same-sex marriage couple seeking family rates at the Natatorium is now in its next phase with the city's law director saying a rate adjustment could be possible. The mayor first declared that nothing could be done because state law prohibits it. It soon became known that it is, in fact, being exercised at other places in Ohio.

Now Robart is resorting to his look into the distant past, telling the Beacon Journal as he groped for an explanation (beyond his probable cultural bias) that rates have been in place for more than 40 years, so why change them now? If so, what other rates- utilities, taxes, etc. - haven't been changed during the same period? ? But Robart continues to resist, saying if same-sex couples are granted family rates it could lead to "massive abuse" by unmarried heterosexual couples. To borrow a term from Robert's GOP county chairman, that,of course, would "be a scandal of Biblical proportions."

To make the mayor's stance even flimsier, the couple applying for the family rate - Coty and Shane May, who were married in Washington, D.C., involves a wounded Iraqi veteran who would use the pool as part of his rehab. That, you must admit, is about as tsk-tsk as the you can get about the mayor.

Think of it: A GI who nearly lost his life in Iraq and moves about with a cane now finds his appeal resisted by a mayor who has nothing more to support his position than he simply doesn't like the idea. Cash it in, mayor. You're not holding the winning cards.

How do you exchange vows with a clock?

(Eleventh of a series)

That's Tea Partier Rebecca Kleefisch, Republican candidate for lieutenant governor in Wisconsin. She says people shouldn't be able to marry clocks. Or a dog. Or a table. That was her quaint way of slamming same-sex marriage. As she explains her ill-timed imagery to make a point:

"This is a slippery slope. In addition to that at what point are we going to be okay marrying inanimate objects?"

That would not be too far off the reservation for some spouses who have long lamented that their partners were inanimate objects. But really, a clock would take it beyond the point of no return even though by Kleefisch's fundamental Christian references, I doubt that the Bible would have anything useful to add for anyone who might want to say "I do" to a tall oak timepiece at the altar.

.