If you’ve never met Toledo Mayor Carty Finkbeiner in person, you may not fully understand his political success. He is a true cult of personality, a man whose presence commands attention and draws eyes and ears toward him. In my admittedly limited travels, only Bill Clinton, Steven Spielberg and O.J. Simpson struck me in person as having that indefinable, demanding frission that Carty has when he’s on.

He looks right into your eyes. He envelopes your hand with a warm, dry shake that can feel like a clamp being tightened. Like Clinton, he makes you feel like an old ally. Like Spielberg, he makes you feel respected. Like O.J., he makes you feel like it’s an honor to have his attention.

The first time I met Finkbeiner, in fall 1992, he was campaigning to convert Toledo to a “strong mayor” form of government. He visited the editorial board of Spectrum, a UT newspaper I founded with Will Nicholes to give the established Collegian some much-needed competition.

During his brief time with us, he passionately advocated for the strong-mayor system and described the advantages the move could offer the city. He was at his convincing best, stabbing his index finger in the air, making direct eye contact and presenting a logical, intellectual case. He assured us the plan was not about him, and that he had no personal interest or stake in running for mayor under the proposed new system.

“Wow,” I thought. “What a leader.”

Then, Finkbeiner twice referred to our Spectrum staff as “The Collegian staff,” called me Mark and ogled a large-busted 22-year-old staff member so openly, she pulled her jacket around her body and left the room. A year later, he was elected mayor.

“Wow,” I thought. “What an a**hole.”

That impression of the Two Sides of Carty has been cemented in my mind ever since. He helps save Jeep. He suggests deaf people should move to the airport so the noise won’t be a factor. He earns international awards and recognition for the city. He kicks training Marines out of Downtown.

The heart of the matter

When Finkbeiner ran for mayor in 2005, Toledo Free Press endorsed him as a man of action, a welcome change from Jack Ford’s sonambulant years. We published Finkbeiner’s guest columns and supported his decisions, even the unpopular ones.

The mayor’s ups and downs are secondary to a larger issue, the influence of Pittsburgh-based Blade Publisher John Block. It’s common in most cities for the media to have influence on the community, but in very few, if any, cities the size of Toledo does one nonresident have the behind-the-scenes grip Block exercises. It’s not about malignant editorials and slanted news coverage, although both are commonplace in The Blade; it’s about manipulation through threat and fear.

If you fail to subscribe to this thesis on evil and rottenness, how about taking a look at the results of Blockbeiner’s influence on city council, the mayor, the port authority board and the county commissioners? Near double-digit unemployment, a population exodus, a meltdown of corporate presences and a shameful number of boarded-over windows should be all the evidence you need of this foul collusion between bully media and weak government.

A local businessperson tells a story that earlier this year at a city function, Finkbeiner was crying to Block about the growing influence of WSPD, WTOL and Toledo Free Press. Finkbeiner reportedly held a copy of TFP in his hand and was tapping Block on the shoulder with it, saying something along the lines of, “John, you have to get the media back under control so we can take this city back.”

“So we can take this city back.”

If you didn’t get a chill reading that, you live in Perrysburg, Sylvania or Rossford.

How has Blockbeiner responded to the criticism and scrutiny? Not directly to any of these media outlets or through public work, but by working more closely together behind the scenes. The manipulated rise of Jon Stainbrook, Rob Croak and Jerry Chabler and the fall of Jim Hartung are not coincidental. 2008 is the Chinese Year of the Rat, and that is the perfect symbol for the voodoo Finkblocker employs, like a dark wizard steering a hurricane of ego and acrimony.

So when Finkbeiner or tools like Chabler and Councilman Lindsay Webb tell WCWA’s Troy Neff that WSPD, TFP and WTOL are on a “vendetta” against anything and everything Blockbeiner stands for, they’re trying to redirect the conversation. They want you to think of me and Brian Wilson and Fred LeFebvre and Bob Chirdon like we’re Miles Bennell in Jack Finney’s “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”: paranoid, screeching at shadows, spending our lives trying to separate the pod people from the humans. Webb condescendingly referred to us as political “purists,” with the same tone that an ignorant person uses to describe a superior intellect as an “Einstein.”

These are typical tactics of villains and cowards, and those labels are as synonymous to me as water and wet.

The theory

The boldest maneuvering so far has been the potentially disastrous stacking of the deck at the port authority. The rumor being passed among elected officials is that Block’s ultimate goal is complete control of the region’s most influential development agency, and his conduit is Finkbeiner. The theory is that, with Finkbeiner’s mayoral re-election chances slipping lower than rust on the hull of Titanic, his path to continued power lies at the port. The theory says the plan is to get enough votes on the board, stall in appointing a permanent replacement for Hartung, allow the November levy to fail, then get Finkbeiner in as port president, promising to get that levy passed next year.

How is the theory playing out so far? First, with a man as qualified as Paul Toth in the interim position, what is the true purpose in a drawn-out search? Any top-shelf national candidate who knows what happened to Hartung, and you can bet they all do, isn’t going to come anywhere near this job. Toth could do this job with integrity and great influence, but he is associated with Hartung, is reportedly very independent, and therefore doesn’t fit with the Blockbeiner plan. Watch for him to be replaced by a Finkblocker crony like Jim Seely or another placeholder.

As for the board itself, here’s a speculative tally:

• Chairman Bill Carroll is not a Finkbeiner fan, and while there is a perception among some port insiders that Block has his ear, Carroll told me Oct. 3 he is in no way influenced by Block and has only traveled to Pittsburgh to meet him once, to seek his support for the levy.
• Vice Chairman Opie Rollison’s law firm, Marshall & Melhorn, often represents Blade interests.
• Jerry Chabler is as close to Blockbeiner as anyone.
• Pete Culp isn’t far behind Chabler.
• Tom Palmer is close personally with Finkbeiner and also works for Blade representative Marshall & Melhorn.
• A. Bailey Stanberry works with Finkbeiner.

That’s six of 13 votes likely to go Blockbeiner’s way.

By next July, Finkblocker will be able to appoint two more members to the board, if Jack Ford appointee Margarita De Leon and Block ally R. Michael Frank step aside. There are names out there such as Clint Longenecker and Tony Plath, but my guess is Blockbeiner’s list of appointees will include Amy Finkbeiner, Stainbrook, Croak or maybe his dog, Scout, if the animal survives another summer.

That leaves precious few independent board votes: Brian Bucher of National City Bank, Nadeem S. Salem of Savage & Associates, Daniel L. Smith of the American Maritime Officers and newly appointed member John Szuch, chairman of Fifth Third Bank.

A wild card is new appointee and UT President Dr. Lloyd Jacobs, who will lean independent away from Finkbeiner but who makes too many phone calls to Pittsburgh.

The county commissioners put Szuch and Jacobs on the board; Pete Gerken and Tina Skeldon Wozniak voted while Ben Konop was on a religious holiday. It’s interesting to note that, while Konop publicly supported Szuch and Jacobs, one week earlier he called Councilman Michael Ashford and urged him to vote for Chabler, proving that, while Konop’s heart and brain may be in Toledo, he left his stones in Pittsburgh.

The remaining piece of the “Blockbeiner Takes Control of the Port Theory” is the levy. It is very important to separate these politics and manipulations from the vital work the port authority staff contributes to our region; it should not be suggested that the levy become a mandate on Hartung, Blockbeiner or the board. But with 30 days or so until the election, are you seeing or hearing much about the levy? In 2004, Communica, an agency Finkbeiner is investigating because of its port dealings, ran an aggressive, out-front and victorious campaign. So far, this year’s push has been strangely low-key. Compare it, for example, to the Hart Associates drive for COSI, which is making news and generating discussion much more visibly.

Is Blockbeiner evil enough to risk a port-levy defeat in the name of “saving the day” next year, when the levy would be on the ballot again?

Don’t ask me; I’m looking for pod people in every corner and remembering a passionate, powerful man who in 1992 looked me in the eye, shook my hand and lied.

Michael S. Miller is editor in chief of Toledo Free Press. Contact him at mmiller@toledofreepress.com.

This entry was posted on Friday, October 3rd, 2008 at 12:00 am and is filed under Lighting The Fuse, Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.