I was going through an
overstuffed file that had been
resting on a shelf in the
cellar. The broken, fake
leather file held old letters,
cards, complaints and even some
compliments going back to the
1960s.
A note from 1989, that I can
barely read, said...
“I hope
you’re still around 20 years
from now… Nobody else will
monitor to see if the Jacobs
brothers keep their promise to
help the neighborhoods.”
Well it’s a surprise to even me
that I’m still around.
But even if I were not, I could
have answered that message
correctly 20 years ago.
The answer... ABSOLUTELY
NOT. Jacobs was never a
giver but always a taker.
(Pictured, Dick Jacobs.)
However, longevity gives real
advantage in watching a
community as I have done.
I’ve remained a very local
viewer of a narrow slice of
Cleveland politics and history.
I did it with intense
persistency. Some would
say obsession.
It has enabled me to have been
around at historic times as this
city declined. I’ve watched
decisions made and how they were
made. And who did what to
whom. I tried to do it
with a critical and
non-conventional eye.
I’ll try to use my experience to
trace back to see how we got
where we are now. I’m
going to use my limited
knowledge to sketch out some of
the actions that took us to
where we now are. I’m not
sure how this will work. I
will use my writings of the last
30 years or more to try to look
at the past as it has led us to
the present.
Conventional wisdom would trace
Cleveland’s downfall back to
December 15, 1978. At
least that is a day of infamy,
as they say. At midnight
on that date, the city fell into
default – not bankruptcy as some
seem to think.
I believe one of the diseases
that infected Cleveland –
especially its politics – was in
large part the irrational desire
of the Cleveland Electric
Illuminating Co. to relieve the
city of its electric system.
Pilfer would be a good
description.
In April, 1976, I wrote in
Point of View (During the
discussion, I’ll be relying on
POV heavily, a newsletter
I published for 32 years,
1968-2000)...
“The
impending sale of the
Municipal Light Plant to the
gouging Cleveland Electric
Illuminating Co. (CEI) may
have less to do with Muny’s
incompetence than with the
fiscal irresponsibility of the
(Ralph) Perk Administration.”
If you remember, Mayor Dennis
Kucinich later refused to pay
Cleveland banks some $15 million
in city borrowings and thus the
city defaulted. The
condition was that he either pay
up or sell the Municipal Light
System, known as Muny Light.
The sale of the city’s electric
system was always the crux of
the matter.
Mayor Perk had been selling
assets to keep the city afloat.
In 1973, he sold the city’s
sewers to the Regional District
for $32 million and spent that
sum in two
years. Perk in this period
also unloaded the city transit
system, some parks, and its
stadium and port facilities.
Muny was the key to prolonged
fiscal survival for Perk.
He was relying on the sale of
the system to replace bond fund
money he had misspent. He
needed to sell another asset.
I had crowned him Mayor
Give-Away for his selling binge.
(Pictured, right Mayor Perk.)
Just how dire Perk found the
city’s financial state, I wrote
in April 1976, had been revealed
in a report by Cleveland State
University professors Edric Weld
and John Burke...
“By
1973,” said the report, “Debt
due for repayment or
refinancing equaled 50 percent
of the total tax receipts. As
of Jan. 1974 debt due equaled
121 percent of total revenue
expected from taxation during
the year. And unless there is
a major increase in tax rates
in the near future, the
problems that will face the
city in 1978 and 1979 when the
short term notes first issued
in 1972 and 1973 can no longer
be renewed will be severe,
since the amounts that must
then be repaid or converted to
new bonded debt will approach
50 percent of the total tax
revenue.”
In essence, the CSU report
foretold Cleveland’s default.
Perk had placed the city in a
precarious fiscal position.
Perk was spending bond money to
keep the city afloat. This
could not continue forever.
Indeed, it has always been my
contention that part of Perk’s
solution to his problem was to
sell the light system and grab
some needed cash.
Perk’s need for cash coincided
with a long-standing desire of
CEI to put Muny Light out of
business. CEI was
pathological in its
determination to put the city’s
system out of business.
Muny Light was an ideological
craw in the throat of CEI
executives. They felt the
public sector had no business
doing what the private sector
should do.
In a 1970 inter-office memo, CEI
stated that a five-year plan’s
objective was...
“To
reduce and ultimately
eliminate the tax-subsidized
Cleveland and Painesville
Municipal Electric Systems.”
The situation at Muny Light,
said the memo, “is one which
has undergone considerable and
severe change during the past
year. Outages have been
frequent and often of major
proportion. It has
received ‘bad press’ because
of this poor continuity of
service…”
CEI should know since it and a
major law firm helped cripple
the city’s municipal system and
cause numerous outages that
damaged its reputation.
In future columns I’ll review
how CEI tried to destroy Muny
Light, a factor that has played
a large part in the city’s
default and decline.