Friday, September 30, 2016

Vote NO on Issue 9. Here is Why.

The City of Dayton wants to increase the local income tax from 2.25% to 2.5% so that it can raise an additional $11 million to spend on services that 60 to 70% of the people paying the tax will not benefit from because they live in suburbs outside the city limits. I wouldn't want the citizens to be hoodwinked. Let's study this more closely. Here is what the ordinance states regarding the use of the funds.

The City is paying the general fund the first $6.7 million. To be vaguely used for services that they already provide. To the extent of available funds they are giving $4.3 to a private non profit to fund one year of affordable pre-school to what amounts to 750 children. That is $5,700 per child. If there is surplus after that, well, it goes into the general fund as well. There is no guarantee they will use the money for what they are telling us it will be used for. Here is what the local paper stated in June.

"The tax increase will help close a $5 million funding gap. It also will pay to maintain fire services, add about 20 police officers, roughly triple the amount spent to pave and resurface residential roads, improve parks and better maintain vacant lots, said Shelley Dickstein, Dayton’s city manager." ....."The city is earning the same amount of money as it did in 1998, which is insufficient to sustain current service levels and pay for strategic investments, Dickstein said."

You can see by this ordinance passed on September 21, 2016 that things have already changed. There are no dollar amounts assigned to policing, road repairs or park improvements. Here are reasons to vote NO on Issue 9.

1) First and foremost you would like to trust your government, right?  Actually they are misleading you. We need to  realize that the city general fund budget for 2016 is $160 million. In 2009 it was $160.7 million. So we are operating at pre recession levels not 1998 levels when the population in the City was considerably higher.

2) We also need to ask if the 20 police officers are in addition to the current force or if they replace 20 officers that have retired. Oh wait. The ordinance doesn't state they will be adding 20 officers. That is all hot air.

3) There is no funding gap. This is a proposed budget on paper. They can balance the budget with no tax increase. They just can't do extra things they want to do.

4) The City just approved a bond issue on 9/21/2016 for road repairs totaling $5.4 million and $4.4 million for new vehicles. If the tax increase is approved they will spend the bond money now and use the extra tax funds to pay the interest on the bonds.

5) The police department budget has only increased 3.26% since 2013 while the City manager office and commission office budgets have grown over 19% in the same time frame. If fire department budgets are to remain constant at $38.5 million a year, why do we need more money to fund something that isn't planned to change?
You need to ask Mayor Whaley who paid for her trips to Germany and Bosnia in the last year. Staff could visit sister cities. The mayor needs to focus on Dayton. The Commission office budget in 2013 was $960,973. In 2016 it is $1,144,900. A $183,927 increase. Why? The City Manager budget has grown by $221,283 since 2013. We lost Tim Riordan. We lost Warren Price. We lost Stanley Early, an assistant City Manager. Since March 2013 the law, director, fire chief, economic development director and the public relations director have all left. Between 2010 and 2013 no department heads left on their own accord. A building services director was fired for wrongdoing.

6) The pre-school promise, which is a noble idea, will get a fixed amount of $4.3 million (if the funds are available). It will not solve the problems in Dayton Public Schools. A year of pre-school for children who's parents can't afford to drive them to school and for which there is no legal requirement for the public school to provide transportation will not work as long as these same children suffer from food insecurity AKA hunger. If the difference between school lunch and school breakfast the next morning is 20 hours and there is no food at home, these children will never learn because they are trying to stay alive and learning has little or no value when you are in survival mode. This portion of the tax increase does not address one of the main reasons children in Dayton fail to graduate. It would be more effective to provide every one of the 6700 babies born in the county a copy of Dr. Tizer's "Your Baby Can Learn" DVDs at $50 each if bought in bulk and award the parents a $200 income tax credit if their child is reading by age 3. This would cost $350,000 the first two years and less than $2 million a year after the third year and impact the entire county, not just the City of Dayton residents. By age 3 most of the county children would be kindergarten ready if they watched those DVDs starting at 3 months old.

7) The purpose of city government is to provide safety services to citizens. Not education and not economic development. Education is the responsibility of the school district and the state. Economic development should be handled by the Chamber of Commerce. Right now your tax money is being squandered on real estate speculation around the central business district and development is being steered and controlled by government.

Vote NO on Issue 9 and force this administration to go back to the drawing board to find ways to use your money more effectively and efficiently to solve real problems.

Monday, February 29, 2016

Election Year Facts - From 1936

Eighty years ago there were no TV sets in peoples houses and no internet to feed you lies in an instant. Instead, people read things and listened to the radio. In today's political climate it seems that the mission of a political party is to stop the other side from doing anything that benefits the public. They use scare tactics and offensive negative advertising to sway your opinion. Facts and truth have little meaning any more. It used to be that the Democrats were challenged with helping the average working man achieve the American dream and the Republicans helped the average businessman to do the same. I found this old brochure from 1936. It is interesting because it lists issues and it appears that both parties are focused on solving those same issues. They just have slightly different ways to go about it. This was pretty much the way it was until the late 1960s and early 1970s when politics was no longer for business minded people who wanted to help the people. Instead it was about big money, a life long career at the tax payers expense and helping friends and family get what they want and not what the people need. Think about this as we vote in two weeks for who we would like to make decisions for us, and again in November when it REALLY will affect your future.

The last page explains the Electoral College in simple terms and tells you why we have an ass and an elephant as symbols. Enjoy!

Monday, March 23, 2015

Speed or Safety?

My Comments on the Speed Safety Cameras in Dayton.

I have always supported the use of safety cameras in Dayton. I always called them Safety Cameras. The former City Manager would look at me and say “They are speed cameras.” My reply was "In the City they are Safety Cameras. In the country they are speed cameras."  Here is why I supported their use. First, watch this video of what happens at red lights.


Then realize that the average cost to society for an accident at an intersection where the cameras are placed is about $850. This includes ambulance and police costs as well as clean up. Nobody thinks of these costs whenever they receive a citation for their bad driving habits. They only think about the fact that they are being patrolled and not protected by our police department. The problem with the speed cameras and the red light cameras is that they were never marketed properly. They were put in place at the request of the police department to catch speeders and people who go through red lights so that they could be ticketed for violating traffic laws. The citations were sent out and you were presumed guilty and asked to pay a fine for wrong doing. You could fight the citation after paying the “fine” and the right to due process in this country is denied even though the penalty is considered a civil one and not a criminal one. No points are placed on your drivers license and no criminal penalty is imposed regardless how many citations you may get. Despite this, these cameras had a positive impact around the city. Accidents at dangerous intersections went down and the number of citations decreased over time as well. Their primary purpose is to actually change driving habits, not catch violators. So these cameras were never marketed as safety cameras but more like “Gotcha cameras.”

I have never received a "ticket" from these cameras but when I saw this article in the local paper I laughed. Instead of suing the state of Ohio to get our way, which is how most bureaucracies think when they don't get their way in the courts and brute force and tons of other people's money can be used, how about we change our marketing plan? What if we changed perceptions in this town. Let's leave the cameras up and use them as a public service to notify people that they should consider changing their driving habits while in Dayton. Let's set the speed cameras at 15 mph over the legal speed limit in the immediate area and announce that SAFETY cameras are in force. I believe that in Dayton they are currently set at 12 mph over the posted limit. I could be wrong but that is way higher than the 3 mph in some jurisdictions. Here is a picture of a sign used in England. It says it all though the words "SAFETY CAMERA" would help.

So, how about this concept? We (the City of Dayton) provide a notification/public safety service. If you “use” the service then you are expected to pay for that service. So, if you drive through an intersection where the cameras are in place and you trigger the camera, you get a nice polite letter in the mail indicating that you may wish to drive at a slower speed in future or not drive through a red light. The fee for the service is $30 and failure to pay will result in this being turned over to a collection agency. If you wish to unsubscribe from this service then you must drive within the 15 mph buffer zone and stop at red lights.

So, what does something like this do? It no longer shouts “Hey, we gotcha! Pay a fine.” It doesn't tell you how fast you were going. It doesn't say you are guilty of any violation. It says “We care about public safety including yours and we provide a notification service in an effort to change bad driving habits in Dayton.” It says that we know you or someone you lent your vehicle to were traveling at least 15 mph over the posted limit for that area and that is not acceptable for safety purposes. We aren't going to fine you but you are expected to pay for this billing notice and that fee is less than a fine if a police officer witnessed the incident. Thank you. I think more people would pay the "fee" than would pay a fine.

I would also like to add that if you receive numerous notifications and are then recorded causing an accident that requires police and EMS, you should be billed $850 for those services.

Why can't our civic leaders think beyond the box and solve problems versus wasting public money to sue in court?

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Let's Answer Some Questions.

Why are you running for County Commissioner?

When people in Dayton woke up the day after the primary election in May 2013, they were upset and confused. They were not upset at me. They did not understand how a mayoral primary is conducted in Dayton when an independent candidate is involved and there are more than two candidates. They were confused because they thought that an independent incumbent was automatically on the November ballot. Generally a primary is to elect a party representative to appear on the November ballot. This was not the case so hundreds of people asked me to stay involved.
In June 2013 I had heard from several reliable sources that the incumbent County Commissioner was not planning to run again for his seat in 2014. I was told that he was looking at another opportunity with a local development group that would pay him almost double his salary. I pulled petitions to run for the seat in July 2013. It made the local paper. Since I am an independent candidate, I was required to get 1852 valid signatures from registered voters in order to appear on the ballot. Party endorsed candidates require just 50 signatures. This meant that I would need around 3000 signatures in order to ensure validity. It also meant that I needed to start early. The incumbent did not express an interest in running for reelection until it was announced in December 2013. At the time of the announcement I had already collected 1000 signatures and was facing a May 5th deadline  to collect the remainder.

I am running for what I believed was an open seat. I am running because 2900 people signed my petition and believe in my vision. I am running because I know I can continue my success I had in Dayton to the county level. I am running because I am an independent who is not afraid to take calculated risks. Montgomery County needs an independent thinker, problem solver, a business minded spirit. We need to Kick It Up in Montgomery County. That is why I am running. That is why you need to vote for me on November 4th.

Gary Leitzell

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Super Event!

I have seven bottles of whiskey that I am donating to the cause. Two Jim Beam bottles from around 1985 that have not been opened. A bottle of Glenmorangie 10 that is from the 1990s. A bottle of Laphroaig 10 that I was given in 2003. A bottle of Makers 46, Old Grand Dad and Wild Turkey. $50 donations receive a food ticket and three drink tickets. Additional tickets can be purchased for an additional donation at the event while supplies last.

  Get Early Bird Tickets Here

Heads up. Drink supplies other than aged whiskey should be fine. The food must be finalized three days in advance so don't wait to get your tickets. If we exceed 50 Early Bird Tickets before the 15th then I can order more brisket.

Drink responsibly please!

Monday, September 8, 2014

Letter to the President

Several weeks ago there was a feeding frenzy by the local newspaper. They pitted Republican Congressman Mike Turner against Democratic Mayor Nan Whaley over the issue of immigration reform and the need to accommodate  illegal aliens under the age of 18 coming to the U.S. illegally. Rather than point fingers and name call, I sent a letter to the president proposing a very simple solution. That was to issue a North American Intercontinental Passport that grant Canadians, Mexicans and U.S. Citizens the ability to travel anywhere in North America and a system to permit working in adjacent countries. Charge an additional $20 for passports and use the money to secure, along with Mexico and Canada, the southern Mexico border which is a narrower border to patrol. I did get a reply. It is the typical political rhetoric that one would expect from a staff member to the White House but I wanted to share it with you. I also felt that you should know how I deal with problem solving. Instead of writing to complain about the comments an elected official makes publicly, I offer "out of the box" solutions. Would this work? Possibly. The real question is "What would it cost to try?"
Dear Gary:
Thank you for writing.  I am deeply concerned about the unaccompanied migrant children arriving at our border.  This is an urgent situation, and it underscores the need to drop the politics, respond quickly and effectively, and fix our broken immigration system once and for all.
My Administration continues to address this situation with an aggressive, coordinated Federal response on both sides of the border.  We’re making sure we have sufficient facilities to appropriately house and process those who cross our border illegally.  We’re also working with Central American leaders to publicize the dangers of the journey and to reinforce that apprehended migrants are ultimately returned to their home countries in keeping with the law.  However, it is our legal and moral obligation to treat unaccompanied children with care and compassion while they’re in our custody.  
Since the beginning of July, we have seen some initial signs of progress along our Southwest border—thanks in part to my Administration’s response.  We are not declaring victory, and we must continue our intensive efforts on both sides of the border.  We will keep taking aggressive steps to surge resources to our Southwest border, deter both adults and children from this dangerous journey, increase capacity for enforcement and removal proceedings, and quickly and safely return unlawful migrants who do not qualify for humanitarian relief to their home countries.  And I’ve asked Congress to provide the funding these efforts need.  
In the long run, though, the best way to truly address this problem is to fix our broken immigration system through comprehensive legislation like the bipartisan bill passed by the Senate last year.  It would have strengthened our border security, equipped us with better technology, and bolstered the resources and personnel vital for an efficient removal process—including additional Border Patrol agents, asylum officers, immigration judges, and access to legal counsel.  It would have also combated transnational crime and cracked down on criminal networks.
Again, I appreciate your perspective.  I am working diligently to bring an end to this situation, and we intend to do the right thing by these children.  But I have repeatedly made clear that parents need to know this is an incredibly dangerous situation, and they should not put their children in the hands of criminals.
Barack Obama

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Fund Raiser at the "Crack House"

Remember this from 2009?

Well, it is happening again. If you missed your chance 5 years ago, now is the time to catch up!

Gary Leitzell
For Montgomery County Commissioner

You are respectfully invited to a Pancake Breakfast at
“This Old Crack House.”

Enjoy homemade pancakes with delectable toppings.
View before/after photos of “This Old Crack House.”
Suggested donation: $15.00 per person
All proceeds and donations will go to “Friends of Gary Leitzell.”

Please RSVP or there won’t be enough pancakes for you!
(937) 253-1359 or
twitter @GaryLeitzell
Where: 114 Volkenand Ave., Dayton, OH 45410
(Across the street from Wayne Ave. Family Video)
Time: 10:00 am – 1:00 pm
Date: Sunday September 7, 2014

Paid for by Friends of Gary Leitzell
Dan Kennedy, treasurer, 525 Heiss Ave. Dayton, OH 45403

Sunday, June 30, 2013

Wagnernomics 101

I wanted to post this sooner but I had to attend the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Nevada to receive an outstanding achievement award for the City of Daytons "Welcome Dayton" initiative. One of the most recognized accomplishments of my term in office that started when I attended a Priority Board meeting in May 2010. The initiative has cost the City little money and has got the most widespread publicity. I make this comment because I understand that money does not equal desired results.
That being said, let us look at A.J. Wagner's financial reports and compare them to Nan Whaley's spending which was reported in the previous post.

A.J. Wagner raised $9,520 of his $78,442 from outside the region. That is 12% of his total. However, like the other Democratic party candidate, he spent most of his campaign funds OUTSIDE the region. Of the $96,678 spent on his campaign in cash spending, $63,194 was spent with businesses located outside of the Dayton area. I consider Yellow Springs and Xenia to be inside the area but not Columbus or Washington D.C. That is a total of 65%. His "in kind" donations totaled $5,100 and that was all derived from local contributors.

I would like to remind people that my $2,056 spent was all inside the city. It was all in kind donations from my own pocket.

I can not endorse ANY candidate that spends other peoples money with reckless regard to the outcome. For Nan to spend $264,000 of other people's money so that she can earn an extra $6,000 in salary is ludicrous. For A.J. to spend $102,000 for a part time job (that can consume as many as 60 hours or more per week if you let it) just does not make sense. One should NEVER have to spend more than one years salary to get elected. (In this case that is $45,000.) Like I stated in my last post, this proves that party affiliated candidates can not beat me, the independent statesman, on a level playing field. They knew it and were not willing to level it. Yet it is the Democratic party that cries out for campaign finance reform when Republicans run against them. Food for thought.

Look at the contributions to each candidate and pay close attention to the spending. In the November election  YOU have to pick the lessor of two puppets in this case. I say puppets and not liars or evils because I do not believe either candidate is truly evil and neither have directly lied to me. However both owe favors to contributors and one, way more than the other. You want a Mayor who represents YOU. You want commissioners who represent YOU. Seriously look at the independent candidates for commission because I can no longer be that representative and vote for the lessor puppet for mayor because I know that I will have an open door to City Hall in that case.

Monday, June 17, 2013

Nanonomics 101

There are some good things about losing the primary election last month. I get to say things the way they are. Not being a candidate in this race, I can point things out without being perceived as making attacks on the other candidates.
Last September I issued a spending limit challenge for the Mayor's race. The limit was $10,000 cash and $10,000 "in kind" to known entities and $20,000 cash and $10,000 "in kind" for unknown candidates. Realize that the Mayor of Dayton is paid $45,000 for a part time job. I believe that in any election you should not have to spend more than one years salary to get elected. I was willing to spend less than that. It was a marketing ploy. Had the two challengers accepted then we would have all received national publicity and could have worked together to promote Dayton to the nation. It would have been the first time three politicians would have agreed to limit spending, level the playing field and win on our own merit without big money playing a part. Neither of the two Democratic candidates accepted the challenge. It proved to me that neither could win on a level playing field.

Nan Whaley won the primary. It is nothing to be proud of. She got 5027 votes. Mostly from party line Democrats. It cost her $264,000 to get those votes. Over $52.00 per vote. There are some statistics that you need to be aware of so that you can make an informed decision in November. I looked over her financial disclosure forms from end of year 2012 and the pre and post primary reports to determine how much money was contributed locally and how much was expended locally. After all, she totes how she supports the region and how she can help it grow.

285 donations out of 730 total were from outside the region. That is 39%. Of the $169,384 that those 730 people or entities contributed, $89,181 was from outside the region. That is 52.6%. Her "in kind" donations totaled $43,032 and of that, $42,592 came from outside the region. Mostly from Columbus, Ohio for a total of 98.9%.

Much of her money came from outside the state of Ohio. Some from Washington D.C. and some from New York. She held fundraising events in Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus and in Indiana. One should be asking why money for a non partisan local election needs to come from outside the region.

Now I think that it is great that she was able to bring over $89,000 to the local area from other places. It could be used to boost the local economy. However that was not the case. Of the $212,767 dollars that she spent on her campaign, $196,843 or 92.5% of the total was spent OUTSIDE the region!

This woman is not going to bring jobs to Dayton. She is not supporting local workers. She says she will but her actions speak louder than words. The unions are supporting her but she is NOT supporting them. If these numbers were other than they are I would be offering praise. Unfortunately they disgust me. You can view the reports for yourself here

By the way, I will analyze A.J. Wagner's reports next. I do not know what to expect at this time. As for me, I spent $2056 of my own money and got 2363 votes, that is 87 cents per vote. Nan and A.J. have a little over $3,000 each left after the carnage. I wonder how much each will be able to raise and spend before November.

Nan boasted to someone that I know that she "creamed" me in this election. I spent less than 1% of her total. The people being creamed are her donors and the people drinking her kool-aide. They are the real losers in this election because their ultimate disappointment will lead to anger.

In warfare this is called a Pyrrhic victory.   (A Pyrrhic victory is a victory with such a devastating cost that it carries the implication that another such victory will ultimately lead to defeat. Someone who wins a Pyrrhic victory has been victorious in some way; however, the heavy toll negates any sense of achievement or profit. A "Pyrrhic victory" can also mean a false or temporary victory where a win entails a loss subsequently or in the bigger picture.)

 Remember, Karma always wins in the end ........