“We challenged our elected officials, civic organizations and leaders of our business community to think differently,” the CAST statement read. “We wanted a better way of approaching our obligations to the owners, and recognition that the status quo in Cleveland isn’t good enough.
“In a city with more than half its children living in poverty, one of the worst public school systems in the nation, third-world infant mortality rates, a rapidly shrinking population, and a vanishing job market and middle class, it could hardly have been a worse time to have rubber stamped the Sin Tax on terms from the 1990’s with no questions asked.”
Peter Pattakos, one of the CAST co-chairs, said that despite the outcome, there was reason for hope.
“As much as anything, this campaign has shown how important it is for people to stand up for themselves in a cash-soaked political landscape in which elected officials and the mainstream press have proven unable to fulfill their intended roles,” Pattakos said. “We’re optimistic that this is an early phase of a broader and highly beneficial public awakening to this reality.”
In a conversation this morning with Scene, Pattakos confirmed that though opponents certainly weren’t pleased with the outcome, he sensed that a “movement” is taking shape.
“People are energized,” Pattakos said. “It’s invigorating to see this many people opposed to the status quo in Cleveland.” He noted that not a single “prominent elected official” supported the efforts of CAST.
Ultimately, though, Pattakos said that a grassroots effort like CAST, even with an active social media presence, was no match for the big spending of the Issue 7 backers.
“There’s no substitute for actual engagement and actual conversation,” said Pattakos, “but it has still proven unable to combat a multi-million dollar campaign in which people were constantly bombarded by misleading, threat-based advertising. Social media has helped, but I think it’s somewhat naive to think that it could be a total answer in an environment where one side is outspending the other 30 to 1.”
Pattakos said that he will definitely be involved in the opposition moving forward, and that for now, he’s pleased that CAST elevated the conversation. From the CAST press release:
“If we were able to raise awareness of critical issues relating to public priorities, inequality, fairness, and transparency in making such large-scale public investments, then we consider our effort a success.”
This article appears in Apr 30 – May 6, 2014.
What really FRIES me is that the NFL, etc. are TAX-EXEMPT entities DESPITE the billions of dollars in profit. Think about that next time you’re there paying your HIGH PRICE for your ticket. Think about it with every over-priced beer or hot dog you buy. Think about the price of parking. And every time you’re longing for a smoke (the very THINGS THAT HELP FINANCE these stadiums) and are BANNED from it. They’ve got the people by the short hairs. The rich get to go to the games and the poor schmucks sacrifice something else from their budget to satisfy their sports obsession. THEY SHOULD BE TAXED as a for-profit organization.
What really FRIES me is that the NFL, etc. are TAX-EXEMPT entities DESPITE the billions of dollars in profit. Think about that next time you’re there paying your HIGH PRICE for your ticket. Think about it with every over-priced beer or hot dog you buy. Think about the price of parking. And every time you’re longing for a smoke (the very THINGS THAT HELP FINANCE these stadiums) and are BANNED from it. They’ve got the people by the short hairs. The rich get to go to the games and the poor schmucks sacrifice something else from their budget to satisfy their sports obsession. THEY SHOULD BE TAXED as a for-profit organization.
This issue is the absurdity of absurdities. Let me get this straight: the purpose of the Sin Tax is to gouge those who purchase alcohol and cigarettes not because anyone is trying to discourage consumption but rather so the County can use that money to pay for sports stadiums that do not produce anything but a fleeting moment witnessing the passing of a football, the dribbling of a basketball and the throwing of a baseball so that such a minute tidbit of diversion can be enjoyed by all. The stupidity of this proposition is enough to make your head spin even though the spin doctors advocating passage of this nonsense are already doing a pretty good job of hypnotizing the voters to actually consider supporting it. At least the Robber Barons of the previous centuries provided something tangible such as oil, steel, railroads etcetera. These team owners do not even provide one tangible thing that could ever be considered with the term “value added.” Almost everyone discusses this “enterprise” as though it is the same thing as industry {which it is not}. The price of admission is essentially a voluntary tax paid by those who can afford it to pay those who don’t need it. If this isn’t a transfer of wealth I don’t know what is.
The real outrage here is the fact that taxes on alcohol and cigarettes will not be used to aid in the reduction of addiction {hence the reference to “sin”} but rather to stuff the pockets of all three teams who could easily afford to pay for the repairs themselves. The vote was rammed through the last time {under somewhat suspicious circumstances} and hear we go again. But this time…not so fast! We the voters of Cuyahoga County are going to fight the proponents on this one and we don’t care if the teams up and go somewhere else {please see my views on entertainment below} because quite frankly there are simply more important things than sports and the unearned money that comes with it. Those in public office who are too stupid and lazy to find other ways to grow a major American city need to resign and leave their self-seeking political ambitions on the scrapheap of history. Don’t ever let it be said that this was time when the tide ran out on Cuyahoga County but rather was the time when the voters rose up to welcome the rising tide of change and rebuked this pathetic paradigm our previous elected leaders embraced. Let the battle be joined.
And now to the real underlying issue at hand:
One of the most disturbing facts about our capitalist nation is the misappropriation of funds directed to the salaries of entertainers. Everyone should agree that the value an athlete, movie star, talk-show host, team-owner, etcetera brings to the average citizen is very small. Granted, they do offer a minuscule of diversion from our daily trials and tribulations as did the jesters in the king’s court during the middle ages. But to allow these entertainers to horde such great amounts of wealth at the expense of more benevolent societal programs is unacceptable. They do not provide a product or a service so why are they rewarded as such?
Our society is also subjected to the “profound wisdom” of these people because it equates wealth with influence. Perhaps a solution to this problem and a alternative to defeated school levies, crumbling infrastructures, as well as all the programs established to help feed, clothe and shelter those who cannot help themselves would be to tax this undeserved wealth. Entertainers could keep 1% of the gross earnings reaped from their endeavor and 99% could be deposited into the public coffers.
The old ideas of the redistribution of wealth have failed, and it is time to adapt to modern-day preferences. People put their money into entertainment above everything else; isn’t it time to tap that wealth? Does anyone think this will reduce the quality of entertainment? It seems to me that when entertainers received less income, the quality was much higher.
Yeah, take a victory lap.. pat yourself on the back. On a seriously divisive issue you did NOT put out good talking points. Whenever serious questions were asked you played the “we’re just volunteers” card. Who cares! You’re representing the people- try to bring your fastball.
Great job by Joe Bialek posting the same fucking comment 200x times.
Ignoring traditional and time tested organizing activities like knocking on doors, fliering, signage, phone banking and coalition building in favor of endless self promotion and fb arguments was the predictable downfall of the anti-Issue 7 “leadership”.
Maybe a transparent, not-self-elected leadership that welcomes ideas from everyone *will* actually create something we can build on.
ps I told you so.
Garry, how much “knocking on doors, fliering, signage, and phone banking” did you expect a volunteer group to be able to accomplish with $6,000?
I held my nose and voted for the sin tax, only because I thought the chances of a more thoughtful, alternative tax passing later on were slim. I think the majority of the anti-sin tax movement is made up of people who are anti tax in general and would end up voting down all the replacement as well. In that case, the city’s obligation would be met out of the general fund.
JR25, That’s the beauty of “volunteers”.
They don’t cost anything. The key is to get them motivated to invest their own time. On their own schedules.
The anti guys, as best as I could tell, made only cursory, and late, efforts to organize using any of the traditional methods of outreach.
I offered, early and often, to work on traditional organizing with each and every one of those self-appointed “leaders”.
After I was rebuffed enough times, I disengaged from their facebook pages.
If they had spent as much time trying to reach actual voters, as they spent jaw jacking on fb with their (former) buddies on the pro side, I wouldn’t have nearly as much to criticize.
But that’s not what happened.
Even at a low 5 minutes per conversation, it would have taken a full 200 weeks of volunteer time at full 12 hour days of 7 day weeks, to speak to 200,000 voters. Considering that the targeted 200,000 would take at least 15 minutes per conversation at absolute best, accounting for travel time, we’re really talking about 600 weeks of volunteers working 12 hour days. 900 seven day weeks, if we’re talking about 8 hour days. Try finding 900 volunteers to give you one full 8 hour day, let alone a whole week of them.
Shame on you for suggesting that the impossible was possible just to get in a cheap “I told you so.”
ROThornhill,
Your comment is conjecture and a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Voting AGAINST Issue 7 would have allowed all kinds of alternative solutions to be presented. Any one of which would have precluded that “general fund” bogeyman.
My bad, JR25.
I didn’t realize you already had all the answers, and that you know my motivations better than I know them
To the best of my ability, I will not respond further to your comments on this article.
Garry Kanter,
As I clearly stated, I don’t believe an alternative tax would be likely to pass. Besides, nobody needs me to vote against Issue 7 to allow them to present an alternative to the Sin Tax. An alternative can be proposed at any time. In fact, alternatives have been proposed and I don’t see any of them passing at the ballot box. The general fund scenario isn’t a bogeyman. It’s what would have happened if the Sin Tax had been voted down and wasn’t replaced by another source of revenue. The only other alternative would be to let the Browns and Indians walk, something I don’t see our local politicians doing.
Thank you for your thoughtful response, ROThornhill.
The Powers That Be put Issue 7 on the ballot. There was no discussion or alternative spresented. It was a done deal upon presentation. The PD helped a great deal, of course.
The *only* “alternative” on the May 6 ballot was Issue 7, For or Against.
We know how voting “For” turns out. I would have preferred to find out how voting “Against” truned out.
This is how *they* always do things in this County/City. I’m glad attention was drawn to this. Because it’s happening with the OC and that hotel, and all kinds of things.
This stuff has to change, or this region will never get healthier.
While I’m glad to see that a movement is going to start, I really don’t see what it can actually do on this without backing from the city leaders. On that front, we saw that not a single elected official in any branch of government was against the sin tax, so we know how that’s going to turn out. I went against the sin tax, and I’m still against it. But thinking realistically here, if EVERY politician was pro sin tax and NO ONE in office went against the big money players, how do you realistically think things would have played out after the sin tax was shot down? No matter what kind of “discussions” were had, the big teams would have ended up getting paid their money. At the very least, now I have motivation to make all sin tax impacted purchases outside of Cuyahoga, and hopefully this really is a springboard to make some changes in the county.
Excellent questions and comments, Mr. Hall.
*It* doesn’t happen overnight. The women’s sufferage movement took close to five decades before the 19th amendment passed. Word for word as Susan B. Anthony wrote it 45 years later. And it passed following her death.
Alan Glazen caught lightning in a bottle: “PR pro seeks redemption. Changes sides, reveals the Truth about the sin tax.”
And pretty much, that’s where it ended.
Alan blocked me on facebook, so I was unable to see the last weeks of “Dawn of a New Beginning”, “New Leadership Ready To Take Over”, “They’re on the run”, and “Marcia Fudge is against Issue 7” postings.
The PR guys believed their own press clippings. Can you imagine?
But the overall dissatisfaction by We The People with Business As Usual *did* get it’s greatest public airing.
Which is huge. It’s why we’re even having this discussion.
Hopefully, some long term thinkers will take whatever remains of the anti-Issue 7 “organization” and build something real from it.
Oh, and there were three elected officials against Issue 7: The mayors of Newburgh Heights and Linndale, plus SE city councilperson Marty Gelfand.
It’s a start.
Why bother to continue to mislead, after you lose; “We wanted a better way of approaching our obligations to the owners, and recognition that the status quo in Cleveland isn’t good enough”
When almost 80,000 voters and the majority of residents of Cleveland vote against an issue that is backed by almost every public representative, you know something bigger is brewing.
My goal is to identify and recruit the area’s young “best and the brightest” to commit to civic service. We need a new generation of candidates to replace those whose time has run out to deliver results.
But I won’t embrace the likes of the Tea Party for any aspect of it. They to me are the bigger enemies than the present political leadership.
I share your views Alan.
As you know, I don’t share your methodologies.
Have you and your self-appointed leadership group come to recognize the need for traditional organizing and collaboration in addition to media and fb?
The proponents of the Sin Tax (Issue 7 on the May 6, 2014 ballot) won because they had tons of money and unlimited resources. They were very well organized and focused with the way their message was delivered on TV, Radio, and via yard signs, and mailings. And, they had won the two previous campaigns of 1990 and 1995.
The opponents lost – mainly because of lack of sufficient funds. When your side does not have the money you need to mount a strong campaign – just about everything appears to go wrong.
We live in an age where there is endless armchair activism on Facebook – and not enough activism in the streets.
As someone who has had differences with Alan Glazen (of CAST – Coalition Against the Sin Tax — and IT’S A SIN, Cleveland Facebook group) and left his group because one of my posts criticizing CAST for not having a strategy to win was deleted – I still have the greatest admiration for Mr. Glazen.
He succeeded in placing the unfairness of the Sin Tax for funding our sports facilities on a local, county-wide, and national spotlight – which in my opinion – will always rank as a singular achievement against tremendous odds.
Our group – the VOTE NO ON SIN TAX campaign took its inspiration from the writings of Peter Pattakos of CAST. Mr. Pattakos made numerous appearances in debates on TV and Radio and provided the rationale for the anti-Sin Tax campaign.
I participated in nearly 90 hours of street demonstrations – the equivalent of walking nearly 300 miles in all kinds of weather – as part of the VOTE NO ON SIN TAX campaign. The demonstrations were carried out in the West Park wards — 16 and 17, downtown Cleveland, and neighboring suburbs on the west side.
Reports of the 33 demonstrations – spread over 2-months were posted on our Facebook group (VOTE NO ON SIN TAX ON MAY 6, 2014), my blog on REALNEO, and on all groups that were against the Sin tax.
Nearly 100 of our VOTE NO ON SIN TAX signs were distributed all over Cleveland and parts of Cuyahoga County. Images of the yard signs can be seen in a google search.
A 2-page flyer was distributed to pedestrians.
From the street demonstrations it was clear that Clevelanders were responding positively towards the VOTE NO ON SIN TAX message but suburbanites were not.
Our campaign has been documented in two Youtube videos.