Hear Ye! Hear Ye! All Rise- The Right Hon. Public Opinion presiding

March 17, 2008 at 2:26 pm 20 comments

THE OPINION, CONCLUSION AND THOUGHT PROCESS IN THIS ARTICLE ARE ENTIRELY MY OWN FROM MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE WORLD OF MEDIA- THEY SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS BELONGING TO OR ENDORSED BY ANYONE ELSE LIVING OR DEAD OR THROUGH ANY OF THE ‘LINKS”!

warning will  robinson

thatwoman by Loraine Ritchey contact thatwb@yahoo.com

On WoM they have the “connect the dots series” – The latest is a “letter” from Mark Stewart and the Lorain County’s attorney Subodh Chandra to the attorneys for the City of Lorain Vorys, Sater Seymour & Pease

There are -in my opinion – 3 parts to this CRA program:

1. The question of abatement itself and whether people agree with tax abatement of any kind. I will not touch upon whether abatement is or isn’t a good idea – that is not my focus and I will leave to “abate or not to abate-debate” for others .

2. The legality of the program in Lorain. Unless the parties come to a settlement agreement this will be decided in the LAW courts. However, I do have questions, whether or not I get answers remains to be seen.

3. The posturing and marketing to the public and media and the utter confusion of he said – he said — the “well played ” public.

And so starting with Marketing 101 – Since the City of Lorain has sent out a letter stating the direct oppostite click to  enlargefrom what is happening with the county “publicity” campaign I present :

The “ad man for the county” and Mark Stewart- Subodh Chandra: http://www.usinpac.com/ia_subodh.asp

( Now I have never met this man or had any dialogue with him, wouldn’t know him if I fell over him so there is NO PERSONAL AXE TO GRIND) however in past months I have had more than a glancing relationship with the CRA as it effects the City of Lorain and my own family.

I am skeptical as all get out when it comes to the use of the “English language” as written by attorneys and in this case more than ever. I am not an attorney, I am not even legal literate, but I am well read and know a marketing campaign when I see one.
I have addressed the “Marketing of Mark” in previous articles, but this latest connect the dots spell out to me “saving of ones political posterior”

The letters and the articles
I have written just about a dozen articles on the CRA ( all factual and documented with responses),however it is the ones using ” marketing techniques” that have been getting the response as you all well know: This picture of Stewart in tights as “Mon Generale Napoleon” has had the greatest impact on my mailbox and statsmon generale

Subodh Chandra, Attorney at Law – paid for out of the real estate fund by Lorain County taxpayers is no stranger to the “political scene” in fact he has run for office and helps others in their run for office. I would feel very happy in my conclusion that Mr. Chandra knows his way around the “political machinations”
It is evident that “legalese” is not the sole content in the letters and articles that are finding their way around the county taxpayers mail boxes, in boxes and media. Sometimes the “rush to manipulate “has backfired for those in the media that have followed the Chandra chant.

In fact “that woman” was contacted ,through a third person by Mr. Chandra ,as to my willingness to “talk” ( now why would he want to “talk ” to an insignificant little woman about CRA when his client won’t even answer the registered letter her daughter sent to his client “Stewart and the County” on October 19th asking for an explanation and all records for the reason for their blanket denial)

Click on letters to enlarge

Can I be more important than the stated homeowner who is still waiting for a reply? Unfortunately, it seems because I am on an appeals committee for my neighborhood CRA district representing the residents, it would have been a conflict for him.

Other times people reputations have been tarnished – ironic that- as an attorney you would think would know that in this country a

“man is presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty”

Dan Given
except apparently in the “court of public opinion”as argued well and long by Mr. Chandra and in the media by Mr. Holcomb , Betleski and Snodgrass (all at the time City council people and at will COUNTY employees-) and there has been no hesitation in using the lightning rod of Dan Given in all correspondence and also in arguments before the Ohio Supreme Court. However according to correspondence on the matter Mr. Given followed the advice of the City of Lorain Law Director and staff. click  to  enlarge

I would also presume in his crucifying of the decisions made by City Council ( see the Stewart denial letter) – whom, I believe, also follow the legal advice given by our Law Director and his staff) Stewart through his attorney Chandra is therefore seemingly questioning the competency of our “legal dept”. What is a council person supposed to do hire their own attorney for a 2nd opinion for every decision?
Laws as written are open to interpretation -one man’s illegality is another man’s letter of the law- bear that in mind…..

Now to the latest marketing piece as sent to Vorys and the City of Lorain:

Note: I am not in this article addressing the ORC or any of the legal terms this is solely about “marketing of a product- in this case the Auditor” and how those who market – manipulate their “target” audience.

I would like to draw your attention to this somewhat insiginificant phrase buried on page 5 of 7

“All correspondence between us documenting the business of the public entities we represent are public records”

Think about that and the rhetoric in the letter the ” laudable language” being used as to the character and the intent of Mark Stewart found throughout the letter.

Would the attorneys for the city really “care” about such language as sent to them?- No ! of course not they would only care about the ORC, the legal terms and definitions not the “flowery holier than thou language” as written by Mr. Chandra. This letter was meant for other eyes and the mention of “public record” is the key

So presumably the offer was presented to the Administration and to City council but according to WoM’s question did the council people “see”the letter”- we won’t know will we as I am assuming that it would have been discussed in Executive Session and therefore we are restricted from their discussions.

Usually what happens is the attorneys present the offer to their clients and give their recommendations; I guess the question I would ask was did anyone “ask to see the copy of the offer?”

So Chandra and Stewart didn’t presumably get the answer they wanted and the letter ( in bold) please share this letter etc (pages5 and 6) and then ta dah!!!!
who  is  old yeller

the old yeller email to Wom – old yeller ( isn’t that the rabid dog)- or perhaps refers to hair colour or maybe the stripe down ones back – who knows- it was definitely not their real name, but they are ,obviously, in the “legal loop”-
no harm in that since Chandra has made all correspondence between attorneys and clients now a matter of “public” record BUT

At the same time of the day – co-incidentally – my blog received an email from the “angryinamherst”… Oh dear I smell a wet dog as this came from the Lorain County Government IP …..could it be the froggy woggy muddy waters leak to get the word out and more marketing or am I off the “Mark” .

Then back comes Old yeller with the “public record” piece ( first he hasn’t a copy – just seen one and then he is requesting one) hmmmmmmmm

and directions on how WoM should go about it. The question begs to be HOW is a citizen supposed to know what was in that letter unless…….. oh ! my the stench of fish and wet dog is once again assailing my intellectual nostrils!
http://www.gorbould.com/blog/index.php/2007/07/

Then we are once again back to the “chant”

“-be they school children……., the mentally retarded, or library patrons

bad bad  City  of  Lorain

Here we go again! It is a wonder to me Chandra didn’t put in musical chips so that when the page was turned heavenly choirs or at least violins would start to play . ( did he think the attorneys for Vorys and the city would melt at that….NO THAT WAS MEANT FOR THE PUBLIC EYES! duh!!!

This letter was written with the express intention ( in my opinion) to be seen by the general public and was another way to put the Stewart position in a favourable light with us – the citizens.

Why ??? we can’t decide the legality of the claims, but we can vote and that is the focus. Ask yourself which ward in Lorain has the most people “voting” and the largest turnout and which ward is now affected the most by the CRA fiasco , which ward is represented by a council man who also is the Deputy AuditorCraig Snodgrass

then ask yourself why is Amherst so important to the CRA situation in Lorain ( why angryinamherst from the county IP ? Amherst???? and not say grouchyingrafton and why is Amherst mentioned time and time again in the letters including the settlement letter – why the “froggy woggy from the county IP ” – the nom de plume
ANGRYINAMHERST” is this starting to look a little suspect as to “the games politicians play”. Certainly does to me at least -it raises some questions and doubts as to intent!

I have presented the “many hats” club
The County players:
Mark Stewart Lorain County Auditor (Saint or Spinner???)

Craig Snodgrass

Greg Holcomb Greg Holcomb

betleski -  phil Phil Betleski

Brett Schuster Bret Schuster

The City Council members also holding down County “at will ” employment :
Craig  Snodgrass Craig Snodgrass 8th Ward Council person and the ward where the majority of the CRA properties are located- who is quoted in the PD article and various other letters and links found throughout this article and others.

Greg Holcomb Greg Holcomb

Brett Schuster Brett Schuster

Betleski-Phil NOTE lost in the May Primary to Dan Given for “at large seat and complained as to illegality on Dan Givens part to the Chronicle .

The Fish Lunch
Judge Betleski The judge for the CRA case in Lorain County Courts brother of former council person Phil Betleski betleski  -  phil

Mark  Stewart Lorain County Auditor

Craig  Snodgrass

And the wooden spoon award wooden spoon award

for stirring the public pot goes to : (drum roll please)
Mark  Stewart and his attorney ( who truly believes in the “media relations”) Subodh Chandra Chandra
and those dots spell ?

dot dash dash dot / dot dash dot dot/ dot dash/ dash dot dash dash/ dot/ dash dot dot

Entry filed under: AMNT, city of lorain, CRA, notorious opponents of exactitude, personal opinion.

Sandy Prudoff- Com Dev. Part three Problem posting Comments

20 Comments Add your own

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Categories

Archives

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 230 other followers

March 2008
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

%d bloggers like this: