The right decisions are not always popular
By
Rory Ryan-hcpress@cinci.rr.com
“Don’t make decisions because they are easy or cheap or because they are popular. Make them because they are the right thing to do.”
“Never give an order you know won’t be carried out.”
In spite of considerable criticism, and at long last, the city of Hillsboro administration made the right decision and honored its pre-existing contract with several Highland County townships for emergency medical services.
Simply put, it was the right thing to do.
After first agreeing to provide emergency medical services to the townships through Dec. 31, 2011, and then reneging on that agreement in a March 17 letter sent to the townships by Hillsboro Safety Service Director Ralph Holt – with a cutoff of services effective June 30 – now, exactly three months later, Mr. Holt has informed the townships – through their legal counsel – that the city will, in fact, provide EMS services through the end of the year as originally agreed.
On March 17, despite a vote to the contrary by Hillsboro City Council and in spite of assurances by Hillsboro City Auditor Gary Lewis that the city budget could withstand the EMS contract, Mr. Holt sent a letter to the township trustees saying that due to the city’s financial hardship the EMS coverage would be canceled on June 30.
This attempt to place blame on the city auditor, if that was the intent, may be one of the more disingenuous comments to ever come from the city administration (except that there have been so many of them, it’s hard to keep track).
If Mr. Holt was, indeed, surprised by the city auditor’s assessment as he has stated, then he’s about the only one.
Hillsboro City Auditor Gary Lewis has maintained throughout this unfortunate ordeal that the city budget could maintain the EMS coverage through the end of 2011. Mr. Lewis has stated this publicly, in the local media and in private conversations with anyone who’s asked.
The city administration has placed undue blame on the auditor before, as those of us who watch the charades of city government know all too well. They were wrong then and they are wrong now.
One also must wonder if the city realizes how much unnecessary worry and grief was placed on many township residents who have worried the past 90 days about a loss of EMS coverage.
Mr. Holt and the city “leadership” have caused more unnecessary grief than any of us will know. But the blame lies with them. And any talk of a “surprise” from the auditor’s assessment is just tilting at windmills.
The majority of us in America’s small towns and rural communities are friends and neighbors. And we ought to start acting like it.
In the past several months, we seem to have lost a little focus on the important things.
Why?
Is the almighty dollar more important than a little compassionate community service? Of course not.
As disappointed as I was in the city leadership for imposing a June 30 cutoff date for emergency medical services for several local townships – in spite of an existing agreement to provide these services through the end of 2011, one thought continued to go through my mind: Would Hillsboro’s first responders really refuse to assist their fellow man in the event of a house fire or multiple-vehicle accident that occurred just outside the city limits?
Would city administrators really place such restrictions on the city police, firefighters and EMTs?
Frankly, I do not believe they would. Furthermore, I do not believe that city police, firefighters and EMTs would ever obey such an order in the event of a major emergency.
Moreover, I’d like to think that in the event of a real emergency, everyone from the mayor to the safety-service director to the police chief to the fire chief would be among the first to respond to the call of duty. And I believe they would.
These are good people. They do work hard. They are compassionate. They care. Really.
Maybe it’s because of all this that I cannot help but take exception to the months-long debate that has been going on between the city and townships. This issue placed unnecessary fears and apprehensions on many of the county’s more vulnerable residents – the very people who most need first-responder services.
Some of us, myself included, have never dialed 911 in our lives. We’re too independent and we’d rather deal with our particular problems without them being broadcast on police scanners and Internet websites.
But a lot of people do need your services. Frankly, that’s why you are as well compensated as you are. If nobody ever called, you’d probably be looking for work in a local factory or, worse yet, at a local newspaper.
So, to the city leaders, permit me to suggest the obvious: The city needs the townships. The townships may or may not need the city.
However, there’s no reason to believe that what’s been a good working relationship for decades cannot continue to be. Work together and get it done.
* * *
Ohio auctioneers
have a valid complaint
The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports this week that a number of Ohio auctioneers are understandably upset over a “little-known amendment slipped into the state transportation bill that would give a single auction firm – a giant of the industry – the exclusive right to handle the sale of construction equipment.”
According to the Plain Dealer, “The only firm that can meet those requirements is Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers, in Springfield. Ritchie Bros., based in Vancouver, British Columbia, is the world’s largest industrial auctioneer with more than 110 locations. Its 2010 auctions worldwide grossed more than $3.3 billion.”
“Why are we passing legislation that is favoring one firm over 3,000 licensed auctioneers in the state of Ohio?” asked Jeff Bub, of Jeff Bub Auctions in Brunswick.
“We all want this amendment appealed,” said Bub, who has held an auction license since 1984. “We want it off the books so we can continue doing what we have been legally able to do all of our auctioneering life.”
Bub said he is upset over an amendment that creates a new, separate license for auctions of construction equipment.
The requirements include: the firm must be on over 90 acres containing an operating facility that is at least 60,000 square feet and grosses more than $1 million a year in Ohio auctions.
However, The Springfield News-Sun reported on June 23 that Springfield lawmakers who worked on the amendment insist it was never intended to create a monopoly, and only applies to auctioneers who sell both large construction equipment and titled motor vehicles.
State Rep. Ross McGregor and State Sen. Chris Widener, both Springfield Republicans, said a clarification is in the works.
“We are not preventing anyone from doing what they had been doing before the transportation budget ... This was designed to handle the unique situation around Ritchie Bros. It was never done with the intention of creating a monopoly,” McGregor said.
Still, Bub questioned “whether the lawmakers had stuck the provision in the transportation bill to give an advantage to an auction house in their backyard,” the newspaper said.
A spokesman at Ritchie Bros. told the News-Sun the company isn’t trying to hurt smaller auctioneers.
“Ritchie Bros. has been operating in Ohio since 1989. We have no intention of monopolizing any part of the auction business,” said Gene Pierce, a consultant hired by Ritchie Bros.
Fair enough. Meanwhile, however, auctioneers around the state may be wise to keep their respective legislators on notice.
They should know, too, that, according to the News-Sun report, “Ritchie Bros. had threatened to relocate out of state if it could not auction off vehicles along with construction equipment, said Jason Mauk, the Ohio Senate Republican spokesman.
“Mauk said the Ohio Automobile Dealers Association compromised by agreeing to allow Ritchie Bros. to sell vehicles as long as other Ohio auctioneers could not begin doing the same.
“To create that situation, the new construction license tailored to Ritchie Bros. was created, which led to the issue with auctioneers.”
Sounds more like bad politics than good government.
Rory Ryan is publisher and editor of The Highland County Press.[[In-content Ad]]
– Fr. Ted Hesburgh, former president, University of Notre Dame
“Never give an order you know won’t be carried out.”
– An Old Soldier
In spite of considerable criticism, and at long last, the city of Hillsboro administration made the right decision and honored its pre-existing contract with several Highland County townships for emergency medical services.
Simply put, it was the right thing to do.
After first agreeing to provide emergency medical services to the townships through Dec. 31, 2011, and then reneging on that agreement in a March 17 letter sent to the townships by Hillsboro Safety Service Director Ralph Holt – with a cutoff of services effective June 30 – now, exactly three months later, Mr. Holt has informed the townships – through their legal counsel – that the city will, in fact, provide EMS services through the end of the year as originally agreed.
On March 17, despite a vote to the contrary by Hillsboro City Council and in spite of assurances by Hillsboro City Auditor Gary Lewis that the city budget could withstand the EMS contract, Mr. Holt sent a letter to the township trustees saying that due to the city’s financial hardship the EMS coverage would be canceled on June 30.
This attempt to place blame on the city auditor, if that was the intent, may be one of the more disingenuous comments to ever come from the city administration (except that there have been so many of them, it’s hard to keep track).
If Mr. Holt was, indeed, surprised by the city auditor’s assessment as he has stated, then he’s about the only one.
Hillsboro City Auditor Gary Lewis has maintained throughout this unfortunate ordeal that the city budget could maintain the EMS coverage through the end of 2011. Mr. Lewis has stated this publicly, in the local media and in private conversations with anyone who’s asked.
The city administration has placed undue blame on the auditor before, as those of us who watch the charades of city government know all too well. They were wrong then and they are wrong now.
One also must wonder if the city realizes how much unnecessary worry and grief was placed on many township residents who have worried the past 90 days about a loss of EMS coverage.
Mr. Holt and the city “leadership” have caused more unnecessary grief than any of us will know. But the blame lies with them. And any talk of a “surprise” from the auditor’s assessment is just tilting at windmills.
The majority of us in America’s small towns and rural communities are friends and neighbors. And we ought to start acting like it.
In the past several months, we seem to have lost a little focus on the important things.
Why?
Is the almighty dollar more important than a little compassionate community service? Of course not.
As disappointed as I was in the city leadership for imposing a June 30 cutoff date for emergency medical services for several local townships – in spite of an existing agreement to provide these services through the end of 2011, one thought continued to go through my mind: Would Hillsboro’s first responders really refuse to assist their fellow man in the event of a house fire or multiple-vehicle accident that occurred just outside the city limits?
Would city administrators really place such restrictions on the city police, firefighters and EMTs?
Frankly, I do not believe they would. Furthermore, I do not believe that city police, firefighters and EMTs would ever obey such an order in the event of a major emergency.
Moreover, I’d like to think that in the event of a real emergency, everyone from the mayor to the safety-service director to the police chief to the fire chief would be among the first to respond to the call of duty. And I believe they would.
These are good people. They do work hard. They are compassionate. They care. Really.
Maybe it’s because of all this that I cannot help but take exception to the months-long debate that has been going on between the city and townships. This issue placed unnecessary fears and apprehensions on many of the county’s more vulnerable residents – the very people who most need first-responder services.
Some of us, myself included, have never dialed 911 in our lives. We’re too independent and we’d rather deal with our particular problems without them being broadcast on police scanners and Internet websites.
But a lot of people do need your services. Frankly, that’s why you are as well compensated as you are. If nobody ever called, you’d probably be looking for work in a local factory or, worse yet, at a local newspaper.
So, to the city leaders, permit me to suggest the obvious: The city needs the townships. The townships may or may not need the city.
However, there’s no reason to believe that what’s been a good working relationship for decades cannot continue to be. Work together and get it done.
* * *
Ohio auctioneers
have a valid complaint
The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports this week that a number of Ohio auctioneers are understandably upset over a “little-known amendment slipped into the state transportation bill that would give a single auction firm – a giant of the industry – the exclusive right to handle the sale of construction equipment.”
According to the Plain Dealer, “The only firm that can meet those requirements is Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers, in Springfield. Ritchie Bros., based in Vancouver, British Columbia, is the world’s largest industrial auctioneer with more than 110 locations. Its 2010 auctions worldwide grossed more than $3.3 billion.”
“Why are we passing legislation that is favoring one firm over 3,000 licensed auctioneers in the state of Ohio?” asked Jeff Bub, of Jeff Bub Auctions in Brunswick.
“We all want this amendment appealed,” said Bub, who has held an auction license since 1984. “We want it off the books so we can continue doing what we have been legally able to do all of our auctioneering life.”
Bub said he is upset over an amendment that creates a new, separate license for auctions of construction equipment.
The requirements include: the firm must be on over 90 acres containing an operating facility that is at least 60,000 square feet and grosses more than $1 million a year in Ohio auctions.
However, The Springfield News-Sun reported on June 23 that Springfield lawmakers who worked on the amendment insist it was never intended to create a monopoly, and only applies to auctioneers who sell both large construction equipment and titled motor vehicles.
State Rep. Ross McGregor and State Sen. Chris Widener, both Springfield Republicans, said a clarification is in the works.
“We are not preventing anyone from doing what they had been doing before the transportation budget ... This was designed to handle the unique situation around Ritchie Bros. It was never done with the intention of creating a monopoly,” McGregor said.
Still, Bub questioned “whether the lawmakers had stuck the provision in the transportation bill to give an advantage to an auction house in their backyard,” the newspaper said.
A spokesman at Ritchie Bros. told the News-Sun the company isn’t trying to hurt smaller auctioneers.
“Ritchie Bros. has been operating in Ohio since 1989. We have no intention of monopolizing any part of the auction business,” said Gene Pierce, a consultant hired by Ritchie Bros.
Fair enough. Meanwhile, however, auctioneers around the state may be wise to keep their respective legislators on notice.
They should know, too, that, according to the News-Sun report, “Ritchie Bros. had threatened to relocate out of state if it could not auction off vehicles along with construction equipment, said Jason Mauk, the Ohio Senate Republican spokesman.
“Mauk said the Ohio Automobile Dealers Association compromised by agreeing to allow Ritchie Bros. to sell vehicles as long as other Ohio auctioneers could not begin doing the same.
“To create that situation, the new construction license tailored to Ritchie Bros. was created, which led to the issue with auctioneers.”
Sounds more like bad politics than good government.
Rory Ryan is publisher and editor of The Highland County Press.[[In-content Ad]]