Sheriff amendment?

[Dan Alaimo]

So I've got my mail-in ballot and I know how I'm voting in all cases but one. I haven't heard much about the proposal to change the appointment of the county sheriff from only the county executive to the county executive plus confirmation by county council. This sounds good to me. Who among us trusts the county executive to act alone? But what is hidden between the lines of this proposal? It seems that something always is in these proposals.

[mjkuhns]

Thanks for bringing this up, because I needed to spend some time on Issue 6 also. So far, after some brief research:

The League of Women Voters supports Issue 6. I know Catherine LaCroix, LWV Cleveland co-president, and fwiw her recommendation is encouraging for me.

I can't find much in the way of published objections to Issue 6, aside from one county council member who objects that it doesn't go far enough.

If anyone else wants to weigh in with something, please do. Otherwise the concept seems reasonable to me, and it does not appear that anything dubious is lurking in the details.

[Dan OMalley]

The proposed charter amendment is well-intentioned as a way to give the Sheriff more autonomy, but as the US Marshall stated before delivering his scathing report about the county jail, we will never fix the problems we have until we return to electing our sheriff. We are the only county in Ohio - and one of the few in the nation - that does not have an elected sheriff. The result is a lack of clear direction, and a bureaucratic nightmare that resulted in an inefficient and disorderly jail where nine people died in less than a year. It was reported that the county sheriff at the time didn't even have a key to the jail. The sheriff should be directly accountable to the people and should answer to voters every four years. If that were the case, I don't think we'd have a lot of the problems we have today.

[Bridget Conant]

The proposed charter amendment is well-intentioned as a way to give the Sheriff more autonomy, but as the US Marshall stated before delivering his scathing report about the county jail, we will never fix the problems we have until we return to electing our sheriff. We are the only county in Ohio - and one of the few in the nation - that does not have an elected sheriff. The result is a lack of clear direction, and a bureaucratic nightmare that resulted in an inefficient and disorderly jail where nine people died in less than a year. It was reported that the county sheriff at the time didn't even have a key to the jail. The sheriff should be directly accountable to the people and should answer to voters every four years. If that were the case, I don't think we'd have a lot of the problems we have today.

And who is ultimately responsible for the jail situation?

The corrupt ARMOND BUDISH!

Time to sweep out any and all candidates associated with the Budish regime.

[Dan Alaimo]

It seems to me this is a good first step toward reforming the election system for this position. I would hate to see it rubber-stamped "fixed" if this passes, but it is good if it would pass.

A related question is how judges are selected. Besides the confusion of many judge candidates with similar names, the situation is rife for corruption if some entity with money wanted to influence a major case it has an interest in. The appointment of judges is no improvement, if not a step back. The Judge 4 Yourself site is a big help, but I have no idea of their biases. Ultimately this comes down the old money-in-politics question, and that's way above my pay grade right now.

And thanks Matt for your research. It seems like the only one who loses in this scenario is the County Executive, for whom I will shed no tears.

Related question: was my usage of "rife" correct vs. "ripe" of some other word?

[mjkuhns]

…he situation is rife for corruption…

Related question: was my usage of "rife" correct vs. "ripe" or some other word?

Merriam-Webster: that's correct.