Waiting for Stephanie Rawlings-Blake (Baltimore: camp, bill, business)

[mrboltonman]

Thinking that $83k/year is chump change is a problem and maybe that's why our government is out of control.

I find this interesting: with the city population at 650k and her pension at 83k that's about $8/person a year. Financially it would be more beneficial for her to stay in office.

It's not totally the amount that bugs me either but that she gets a tax payer early retirement for being convicted then pleading guilty. I can understand maybe getting some of her pension but the entire thing with increases is absurd.

I don't see any good from the prosecution but a lot of tax payer wasted money! The charges with the evidence to me really didn't justify the cost of this ordeal.

[Tallybalt]

I agree. I don't condone what she did but the State spent two years and probably more than a million dollars in prosecuting her over stealing a few gift cards. The investigations had initially been launched with the attempt of finding fraud in her dealings with developers, something for which the prosecutors completely failed to find convincing evidence. They just happened to stumble onto the gift cards more or less by accident.

She, by most accounts, had been an excellent and efficient mayor of Baltimore, and I would have been satisfied had the prosecutor levied a big fine against her and let the matter rest.

Originally Posted by mrboltonman

Thinking that $83k/year is chump change is a problem and maybe that's why our government is out of control.

I find this interesting: with the city population at 650k and her pension at 83k that's about $8/person a year. Financially it would be more beneficial for her to stay in office.

It's not totally the amount that bugs me either but that she gets a tax payer early retirement for being convicted then pleading guilty. I can understand maybe getting some of her pension but the entire thing with increases is absurd.

I don't see any good from the prosecution but a lot of tax payer wasted money! The charges with the evidence to me really didn't justify the cost of this ordeal.

[barante]

I've been doing other things so I haven't been following the news closely. But it seems to me that intriguing question is the identity of the new president of the City Council will elect, presumably from among its members although I don't think there is anything that would prevent from going outside.
In other words, the question is will the members of the City Council select a person who may run the No. 2 office also in next elections and thus would have a leg up as an incumbent. Or will they go for a seat-warmer, some old war horse -- come in both genders -- who is about to retire. Like Agnes Welch? (Even I could not take such a possibility seriously because someone else would have to preside over meetings).
I have known experienced a number of City Council presidents in my time, ranging from the mercurial Walter Orlinsky to the marypattish Mary Pat Clarke. All have been chaotic. Sheila Dixon certainly gave no indications that she had any potential for an effective mayor.
Baltimore has a strong-mayor, who rules through a Board of Estimates he control. So ideally the City Council would act as a counter-balance. It seldom does. That's why the president's job -- and person -- are so important.

[Woodlands]

Originally Posted by barante

I've been doing other things so I haven't been following the news closely. But it seems to me that intriguing question is the identity of the new president of the City Council will elect, presumably from among its members although I don't think there is anything that would prevent from going outside.
In other words, the question is will the members of the City Council select a person who may run the No. 2 office also in next elections and thus would have a leg up as an incumbent. Or will they go for a seat-warmer, some old war horse -- come in both genders -- who is about to retire. Like Agnes Welch? (Even I could not take such a possibility seriously because someone else would have to preside over meetings).
I have known experienced a number of City Council presidents in my time, ranging from the mercurial Walter Orlinsky to the marypattish Mary Pat Clarke. All have been chaotic. Sheila Dixon certainly gave no indications that she had any potential for an effective mayor.
Baltimore has a strong-mayor, who rules through a Board of Estimates he control. So ideally the City Council would act as a counter-balance. It seldom does. That's why the president's job -- and person -- are so important.

It stands to reason that Rawlings Blake will likely implement the policies outlined by the Dixon Administration... i.e. Green Initiatives and Development etc. I dont think she would propose any radical changes given the budget climate and 'trial fatigue' that plagues most residents and city workers. So I think that most of the top brass that want to remain will be able to do so.. except for Dixon personal assistants.. who will likely be replaced with RB current staff and personal assistants. I think she will wait until she has to run for the office following serving out Dixon's term before she tries any major "new" initiatives of her own. The Dixon agenda, as you mentioned, was popular and fairly effective.. so as Abe Lincoln would say "Why change horses in mid stream".

What would be interesting is who emerges to challenge Rawlings Blake in the general election. Does she and the Current City Council get along???Whomever becomes the new City Council Prez could run for the Council Prez seat.. or challenge her as Mayor... Dont know all the Politicos in the City but R.B could be vulnerable depending on how she serves out this term.

[barante]

Anything can happen . . . but mayoral-level talent is extremely scarce in Baltimore. That's why O'Malley happened. So unless she messes it up really badly, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake will have a leg up.

[barante]

The whole political landscape in Baltimore will get clearer after this summer's Democratic primary for statewide offices, including the governor's. There may be some lingering suspense in November, but not much. At least that's what I think.
Watch out for Pat Jessamy, the city's top prosecutor. She also will face re-election this year. She is a shoo-in. While O'Malley was mayor, he kept constantly harping on her, but she has been faring much better lately. For all these years she has been making the rounds around the city. Would she run for mayor? She would like to, she has said repeatedly.
Similarly, if Cathy Pugh wants to try for mayor, nothing would prevent her since she would keep her state Senate job, if defeated. In campaigning for City Council president's job against Sheila the last time, she showed no vision for the city.
If Jessamy decides to run for mayor, she would have to be regarded as a strong contender because she is closes to the profile of the average city voter. But an incumbent mayor has lots of power, so all this talk about Stephanie Rawlings-Blake not being re-electable is lots of nonsense at this point.

[rudy_d]

Originally Posted by barante

Watch out for Pat Jessamy, the city's top prosecutor. She also will face re-election this year. She is a shoo-in. While O'Malley was mayor, he kept constantly harping on her, but she has been faring much better lately. For all these years she has been making the rounds around the city. Would she run for mayor? She would like to, she has said repeatedly.

If Jessamy decides to run for mayor, she would have to be regarded as a strong contender because she is closes to the profile of the average city voter.

For Baltimore's sake, I sincerely hope you're wrong. The last thing the city needs is Jessamy as mayor. What it really needs is a viable candidate with a large warchest to emerge from the city's legal community to run against her for state's attorney.

Jessamy would be much better suited as a public defender.

[barante]

If this report is right and Jack Young has his City Council colleagues' votes to succeed Rawlings-Blake as the CC president, you will see a mad run of candidates to challenge him in next elections. Jack Young is pretty much a zero, as far as I am concerned.

City Council Watch 2010: Councilman Young hi-Jacks the votes for the Presidency
There will also be a lot of turnover in next elections. D'Adamo has told me he will not seek re-election; Welch finally should retire; Spector's health is not what it used to be, etc.

[Woodlands]

Originally Posted by barante

If this report is right and Jack Young has his City Council colleagues' votes to succeed Rawlings-Blake as the CC president, you will see a mad run of candidates to challenge him in next elections. Jack Young is pretty much a zero, as far as I am concerned.

City Council Watch 2010: Councilman Young hi-Jacks the votes for the Presidency
There will also be a lot of turnover in next elections. D'Adamo has told me he will not seek re-election; Welch finally should retire; Spector's health is not what it used to be, etc.

Unfortunately I have to admit that I am not knowledgable of any of the Councilpersons outside of my own district where I live.. Just curious on why you feel Jack Young is a non starter? If all those councilpersons leave office during the next election it will be interesting to see who replaces them. It represents an opportunity to really get some people in there who can continue to move the city forward and/or getting idiots in there that could set the city back.. I hope its the former and not the latter.

[barante]

I have nothing against Jack Young. He is just a less than outstanding product of East Baltimore politics who has no strong leadership qualities. He certainly is no No. 2 in a city where a person in that position may acceed to the mayor's job. More fatally, he is unknown citywide and has no political basis outside of his own impoverished district.
I have believe that if he becomes the CC prez, he is only going to be a seat warmer who will receive a nice pension if he loses and get a no-show job somewhere.