Today's editorial in The Morning Call, supporting Pawlowski's Hall of Shame, is inexplicable. Simply put, the program ignores a system of ordinances and legal remedies, and resorts to ridicule, not unlike the stockade in Puritan New England. The first inductees were certainly soft targets, young brothers from New Jersey. Are their records and violations any worse than several well known local landlords, not at all. Not that many years ago, the newspaper survived a hugh slander lawsuit involving another targeted "slumlord". To this day, whenever using his name, reporters must first get clearance from their editors, who in turn consult with their legal department. I find it curious that the paper would again go down this road, but what's really amazing is that every proposal ever made by this mayor, has been endorsed on the Editorial Page.
Michael I couldn't agree more. Evidently in this case they don't even believe that council has any say in the matter. By the way and since no one talks about it, do these renters pay the rent and how difficult is it to collect the rent? Isn't it difficult to evict renters as I have been told?
ReplyDeletePawloski,Pawloski, Pawloski, he has got to go. Thanks for hanging in Michael.
Bob
All it's going to take is targeting the wrong person. Sooner or later, this list will be stopped and will be used against Pawlowski in future elections.
ReplyDeleteMM wrote: "...but what's really amazing is that every proposal ever made by this mayor, has been endorsed on the Editorial Page".
ReplyDeleteMichael -
I don't know all the specifics of what happened, but I think the Call's support of the Mayor is somehow tied to having the taxpayers pay for (what is essentially) the Call's parking deck at 6th and Linden.
Michael, while I do not support this proposal, I have to take exception with the claim that the paper endorses every program of the Mayor's. Just last week the paper recommended voting no on the proposed charter change which is desperately needed to fix the way the city procures goods and services. It just seems the paper is only willing to support the things that they feel will be popular.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous -
ReplyDeleteI have heard that the Mayor himself is going around asking for a no vote on the basis that the charter amendment as written would put too much power in the hands of council.
Perhaps the Morning Call already received that memo.
So when will the mayor put signs on the residences of local felons? Aren't they doing more damage to the city than lousy landlords?
ReplyDeleteAnon 4:18 -
ReplyDeletePlease. One issue they disagree with? They have supported everything.
More bureaucrats. A phony "community policing plan" that cost taxpayers a huge amount of money. New taxes. Borrowing money (for two years in a row) to hide large deficits.
The Mayor and the head of the editorial board do not meet several times a week to discuss the weather.
MM,
ReplyDeleteI like the photography at your right sidebar. Very nice.
Hilliard,
ReplyDeleteJust last week the paper suggested a no vote on the referendum. This referendum was the mayor's idea.