For the past 20 years — until recently, I was part of the area represented by Toledo District 1 councilmen.
Because of my involvement with the neighborhood and community I came face to face with those who represented me in our city government.
I expressed my concerns over who would replace our former councilman in 2020. When John Hobbs III was appointed as District 1 councilman, I had no idea who he was.
After he began to serve our district, I certainly read about the reported issues of concern such as reviewed in your recent editorial in The Blade (“Hobbs not right choice,” Jan. 4). It took a while before we even met.
Our Reynolds Corners neighborhood again was faced with challenging issues, especially since we had no legitimate neighborhood organization listed with the city of Toledo. We do have several Blockwatches.
Despite Mr. Hobbs’ past, I have found that he and his staff person have listened to his constituents and he has become more that the average councilman with his engagement with us. He came when requested to our meetings, encouraged us to organize, and followed up with responses to our inquiries.
And Mr. Hobbs’ newsletter, which lists neighborhood issues and plan commission projects, should be a standard for all council people.
As a concerned citizen who has tried to communicate in so many ways what I think needs to be changed in our city government, no one gets a higher score from me — although Katie Moline is up there, too, as far as acknowledging what I have said and perhaps acting on it.
I have publicly shared this message of positivity toward Mr. Hobbs to the Reynolds Corners community many times in the past.
Yes, wrongdoing needs consequences.
Yet, in a position of citizen trust, I now trust him more than most other council people and truly appreciate his outreach to citizens.
SUE TERRILL
South Toledo
The writer was involved with Blockwatch for 20 years in the Reynolds Corners area.
Dems right to bypass Merrin
At first, The Blade editorial “D’s pick wrong Speaker,” Dec. 5, reads like a disgruntled citizen’s ranting complaint about state Rep. Derek Merrin’s loss as Speaker of the House.
But as a lead editorial from a staff who knows better? How embarrassing for the Blade.
Instead of lashing out erroneously at Democrats who voted for Rep. Jason Stephens as Speaker, try presenting some “plausible” reasons for Mr. Merrin’s defeat. Anti-labor, right to work agenda? Certainly. But Mr. Merrin also supports expanding the school voucher program (threatening public schools), and hasn’t voiced concerns about religious intrusion into public school curriculum. As to women? He clearly supports restricting a woman’s right to control her own body and for a total ban on abortion.
Also, Mr. Merrin faces a two-year limit as his time runs out for re-election; Mr. Stephens can remain six years. Democrats and many Republicans pointed this out.
Rather than obsessing on the Larry Householder scandal that you say Democrats helped facilitate, why not mention how many Republicans also voted for Mr. Householder (I was in the chamber for that vote, by the way)?
And why not mention that Mr. Merrin supported the illegally drawn unconstitutional district maps voters were forced to use in the last election? Or that Ohio’s gerrymandered districts are considered one of the worst in the nation, denying a fair vote?
No, contrary to the editorial, I am glad state Reps. Michele Grim and Elgin Rogers voted as they did. In so doing, they did put this constituent’s interests first.
SHELLIE McKNIGHT
Whitehouse
Aggie Fund editorial off base
The Editorial “Pass on Aggie Fund” (Dec. 29, 2022) did more than present The Blade’s conservative, anti-abortion position; it revealed a proclivity toward deception and muddled argumentation.
From the very start, the editorial is misleading. It suggests that the Aggie Fund’s sole purpose is to transport women seeking abortions, when in fact, the fund’s purpose “is to make choosing to terminate a pregnancy financially accessible and to keep abortion safe and legal.” It also suggests that “Councilman” [sic] Michele Grim proposed appropriating American Rescue Plan Act funds to the Aggie Fund as merely a “parting shot,” rather than a public health initiative she wholeheartedly supports.
The Editorial Board then argues speciously that Toledo City Council should not support the Aggie Fund because it would be contentious and look bad for Toledo and it would further reduce the population when we need more people “coming up the generational ladder to fill the positions needed to maintain the economy, let alone grow the economy.” So, in other words, by not publicly supporting the Aggie Fund, we can avoid a “bitter moral debate,” look good, and promote population and economic growth in Toledo?
Finally, the Editorial Board asserts that there are “many resources in Toledo to help women bringing children into the world” without naming any and without considering the physical, emotional, and financial demands on the woman who brings that child into the world.
In short, the Blade’s argument against using ARPA funds to back the Aggie Fund is not only poorly constructed, it is contentious and misogynistic.
Deborah Schwartz
Sylvania Township
No more rust
I agree with the Blade Editorial Board (“2023 A Huge Opportunity,” Jan. 1). Toledo is proof that we can bury the term “rust belt” by investing in Ohio.
Historic investments from the American Rescue Plan, the CHIPS Act, and the bipartisan infrastructure law are already making a difference in the lives of northwest Ohioans: from the Glass City River Walk and Glass City Center renovation to housing repairs and tax credit funding, and to new manufacturing investments and solar innovation.
I look forward to working with all of our partners in the Greater Toledo area to help maintain the region’s momentum in the new year.
U.S. SEN. SHERROD BROWN
Washington
Farmers losing money
While your article about rising farmland prices (“U.S. farmland prices soar to record; Cost per acre leaps 20 percent just in the third quarter from a year ago,” Dec. 26) and how much more money farmers are making this year thanks to rising commodity prices was interesting, the writer failed to note some very important details.
First off, diesel fuel prices have more than doubled over last year. Second, fertilizer and seed prices have more than tripled over last year.
Throw in increased labor and parts cost, supply-chain issues, and no government support for crops, and you have most farmers — at least in Michigan and Ohio — actually losing money.
While it is true land prices have increased, so have rental rates for acreage. So unless the small and midsized-farmer want to sell out to a larger farmer or co-op — and pay capital gains — they have to suck it up and hope their costs go down and commodity prices stay up. The grass is always greener on the other side but always check the water bill.
BILL FLAISHANS
Ida, Mich.
No praise for Portman
I strongly question the recent Blade editorial (“Portman exit ends era,” Dec. 18) praising the accomplishments of ex-U.S. Sen. Rob Portman.
The many years he served in the U.S. House and Senate should have motivated him to speak out during the four years of the Trump administration and the aftermath of the 2020 election.
With the wealth of information available to the politicians on the inside of the U.S. government, he chose not to speak out about the lies former President Trump and his radical supporters were spreading. I question his loyalty. Which comes first, the GOP, Mr. Trump, or the country and its Constitution his oath was pledged to uphold? If Mr. Portman had the courage to make a statement condemning the lies about the stolen election, it might have encouraged other prominent GOP politicians to also speak up.
A little courage on the part of a few GOP members of the House and Senate may have prevented the Jan. 6, 2021 riot from happening.
I feel Jan. 6 was the darkest day in our county’s history. How close did we come to losing our democracy?
RONALD KLOCINSKI
Maumee
First Published January 8, 2023, 5:00 a.m.
