CLEVELAND, Ohio - U.S. Sen. Jon Husted signed on to a bill to prevent SNAP recipients from using their public benefits to buy candy, ice cream and other sugary foods.
Does it make sense to prioritize nutrition? Or is the government misguided? We’re debating on Today in Ohio.
Editor Chris Quinn hosts our daily half-hour news podcast, with editorial board member Lisa Garvin, impact editor Leila Atassi and content director Laura Johnston.
You’ve been sending Chris lots of thoughts and suggestions on our from-the-newsroom text account, in which he shares what we’re thinking about at cleveland.com. You can sign up here: https://joinsubtext.com/chrisquinn.
You can now join the conversation. Call 833-648-6329 (833-OHTODAY) if you’d like to leave a message we can play on the podcast.
Here’s what we’re asking about today:
With some Statehouse lawmakers narrowly failing in their bid to protect taxpayers from hidden costs in the Browns Stadium proposal, we asked readers whether any public money should go to sports stadiums. What did they tell us?
Is Mike DeWine shying away from his opposition to the state’s borrowing $600 million to help the Browns build a new stadium?
The mystery of the Ohio Legislature taking away millions from a Cleveland riverfront development got more interesting this week, with a move by a lawyer for the project. What happened?
What did the association of Ohio county coroners have to say about the surprise move by the house to wipe them off the face of the earth. Another Ohio House move born in complete secrecy without hearings or discussion?
We reported on an embarrassing backlog at City Hall in the lead paint cleanup effort. Is it fixed?
The Cleveland Foundation persuaded University Hospitals to move a medical center to new, innovative building in the Midtown neighborhood. Why is that location ideal for the patients the center serves?
More Today in Ohio
We have an Apple podcasts channel exclusively for this podcast. Subscribe here.
Do you get your podcasts on Spotify? Find us here.
RadioPublic is another popular podcast vehicle, and we are here.
On PodParadise, find us here.
And on PlayerFM, we are here.
Read the automated transcript below. Because it’s a computer-generated transcript, it contains many errors and misspellings.
Chris Quinn (00:01.561)
Our readers have made some clear feelings known about what they think of public financing of stadiums. One of the topics we’re talking about on Today in Ohio, it’s the news podcast discussion from Cleveland.com and the Plain Dealer. I’m Chris Quinn here with Lisa Garvin, Leila Attasi and Laura Johnston. And because the Guardians had their home opener this week, I’m throwing a curve at
the panelists and starting with a topic I didn’t tell them was coming, hoping to generate some fiery discussion. We’ve long discussed and I’m saying when I say long, I’m talking probably 12 years trying to tackle the idea of how SNAP benefits formerly called food stamps are used. We’ve wanted to measure how much of them are used for junk food versus nutritious food. And we’ve had many debates over the years about whether
there should be limits that if SNAP benefits are about stopping hunger and providing nutrition, shouldn’t we limit the use on sugary drinks and Frito-Lay products? The other argument, often espoused by Leila Tasi, is that we should let parents decide what to spend on. And if they think their kids need some comfort food in the poverty that they live through, that maybe we should let them make that judgment.
We were never able to get the percentage because the big food companies pretty much pay off the government to keep it all secret. You cannot get that measurement anywhere. Frito-Lay and Coca-Cola make quite a bit of money off of SNAP benefits. They don’t want America knowing how much. This is now a debate because this week, John Husted signed on to a bill that would prohibit the use of SNAP benefits for sugary drinks, ice cream, candy and the like. Interestingly,
doesn’t affect the snacks like Frito-Lay. And I suspect it’s because Frito-Lay and those companies are making their proper campaign contributions. Big sugar’s not. Ultimately, they will and this will all go away. But while it’s here, let’s talk about it. Layla has recently become a increasingly popular opinion columnist. So finally, after all these years, she feels free to offer her opinions after all of her years of reticence.
Chris Quinn (02:24.289)
Leila, why don’t you talk a little bit about your feelings on this?
Leila (02:27.342)
my, okay. Well, when I saw your note come through this morning, I really actually chewed on it for a while because I know how I’ve felt in the past. No, I didn’t, and you’re really throwing me for a curve, but I think I’m going to stay true to my feelings on this all along, which is that the federal government shouldn’t dictate what SNAP recipients can buy. I mean, first, it’s a matter of dignity.
Chris Quinn (02:34.393)
Because you suspected I’d bring it up on the podcast even though I didn’t warn you.
Leila (02:51.466)
We trust people to make countless decisions in their lives every day. There’s no reason to treat low income families differently simply because they need help affording food. A second enforcement would be a logistical nightmare requiring new layers of bureaucracy that would end up wasting taxpayer dollars. And also restricting purchases doesn’t actually solve the real problem, which is lack of access to affordable healthy food. If we want better outcomes, the answer is investing in nutrition education.
expanding access to fresh foods in underserved areas and raising benefits so people can truly afford to make healthier choices, not policing shopping carts.
Chris Quinn (03:29.785)
I never felt in all of our discussions over the years about this that either of us was dug in. So I’m really playing devil’s advocate here because I have mixed feelings. There’s a lot of gray in this discussion. I do think it would be easy to enforce though. That’s the one thing I take serious issue with. With the coding of groceries at grocery stores, you could just set it so that stuff is blocked. I don’t think that would be as complicated as you do. But let me push back a little bit. The whole idea, the creation of this.
was because people were going hungry and we wanted, especially children, to have access to nutrition. If half of the money that taxpayers have put into this to solve hunger is being used for things that are not nutritious at all, they’re actually the counter to nutrition, how can we say taxpayers should keep paying for that? Why should I have to pay for somebody to get food that is making their health worse when
Laura (04:27.008)
I feel like this is one of those easy to point to anecdotes that people get upset about. Like I was in a grocery store once and I didn’t have a lot of money and I was going to make a cake for my kid from scratch, but there was a person with Snap benefits in front of me and they were buying a giant frosted pre-made bakery cake, right?
And it is, people get upset about that. People get really angry. It’s a very personal thing. But I agree with Leila in that I think the food desert issue is bigger and that some people don’t have great access to all the fresh produce that we might at our giant eagle, right? And that’s a choice they might have to either go hungry or eat Doritos that day.
Chris Quinn (05:31.937)
Lisa, what do you think?
Lisa (05:34.225)
I’m sitting here trying to parse it all out. mean, I was a food checker back in Texas back in the 80s. And I remember I had to keep a list in my head of things I couldn’t sell to people who are on wick or food stamps. But I know that Texas a few years ago tried to pass a law that would have exempted like sugary drinks and other from SNAP benefits, but it never passed. Honestly, I’m ambivalent about it all. I’m not going to weigh in on this.
Chris Quinn (06:02.893)
They I think it’s interesting that the bill just deals with the sugary stuff because if you’re going to look at this, why aren’t you looking at Cheetos and Tostitos and every other kind of snack, empty styrofoam like snack food that’s out there? And again, I believe this is all about campaign contributions. Congress is not getting what it wants from Big Sugar. It wants them to kick in. We’ll look at the campaign finance forms of people like John Husted.
Laura (06:14.232)
Mm-hmm.
Chris Quinn (06:31.115)
over the next couple of years and see if all of a sudden it’s filling up with that money. But it does raise this debate again. And I think most of America will be divided in much the way we’re discussing here. we’re going to do a story where we talk to health officials and ask them what they think, because they’re the ones dealing with an obesity epidemic and all sorts of other issues. And if this is about nutrition,
Leila (06:45.706)
I mean.
Chris Quinn (07:00.855)
Why should it be used for stuff that is not nutritious whatsoever?
Leila (07:05.62)
You know, another thing to throw into the conversation is that restricting what people can buy with SNAP won’t stop them from buying junk food. It’ll just shift how they spend their very limited money. So if someone really wants soda or chips, they’ll use whatever little disposable income they have to get it. And that means less money left over for rent or medicine or transportation or other essentials like that. So in the end, restrictions could actually make it harder for families to meet their basic needs, not easier.
Lisa (07:16.657)
Mm-hmm.
Laura (07:23.138)
Mm-hmm.
Leila (07:35.53)
And so if the goal is better nutrition, I go back to what I was saying that better access and education are far more effective instead of like forcing people into making impossible financial choices.
Lisa (07:48.273)
Well, and two, I guess I do have something to say is that you have all these fast food restaurants where you can feed a family for less than $10. You know, they have value meals and all kinds of stuff and none of it is like really healthy food. But if you’re trying to feed three kids, you know, you can go to a fast food place and do that. And also too, when they’re trying to give nutritious lunches to kids, kids are throwing the vegetables and produce into the trash. They’re not even eating it.
Laura (08:12.782)
And I also, go ahead.
Chris Quinn (08:12.877)
That’s an interesting point, Lisa, and that if you go to a fast food restaurant, and all of a sudden you cannot buy any of the drinks they have there, because let’s face it, that’s what they sell is sugary drinks. What does that do to the meal? Are people going to get water? I I don’t think that’s been addressed. That’s a good point. Laura?
Laura (08:31.886)
I was just going to say, I had this question for a long time, like, why do poor people go to fast food restaurants? Why can’t they just cook at home? That would save them money and it would be more nutritious. But not everybody has a fully equipped kitchen. Some people are living in squalid apartments. They don’t have everything that they need to cook. They might not have even electricity. They might be living in a hotel room. And so you can’t judge other people based on what you are used to, right? You don’t know their circumstances.
Chris Quinn (08:59.577)
I do think this would be popular with the Trump voter. And it’s never happened before because these places all have huge amounts of campaign cash because they don’t want limits. So it’ll be interesting. I sent a question out about this on the text messages I send out each day. I’m going be interested to see how people respond. It’s an interesting issue. And John Husted actually did something that we could talk about on this podcast that was halfway interesting.
You’re listening to Today in Ohio. With some statehouse lawmakers narrowly failing in their bid to protect taxpayers from hidden costs in the Brown Stadium proposal, we asked readers through my text whether any public money at all should go to sports stadiums. Lisa, what did they tell us?
Lisa (09:47.665)
Yeah, you got over 200 text responses to your from the editor subtext yesterday. And the question you asked was should Ohio help finance a new Brown Stadium with $600 million in bond debt? Only a dozen of the responses said yes. And those that did say yes, they say, means more jobs and more investment. They pointed out, one pointed out that the Ohio State football team is subsidized by the state.
Another commenter said, just bite your tongue and build it. Haslem has plenty of money and he’s going to leave if he doesn’t get what he wants. But the rest, most of them were adamantly opposed. They say there are big problems with spending taxpayer money on stadiums while cutting back on public schools, libraries and food assistance. And then one commenter said, what other business has taxpayers pay for the owner’s facility where he does business? Others said, put it on the ballot, let people vote about it.
And then of course, people brought up what we’ve brought up in the podcast is it’s going to make traffic around Cleveland Hopkins airport a nightmare unless they do some major changes over there.
Chris Quinn (10:49.433)
Yeah, we’re trying to inject that into this debate because that is a massive hidden cost. To redo the roads around Brook Park to accommodate this kind of thing will cost the public mightily and no one has been talking about that. And that will ding the taxpayers. I suspect that the reason that Republicans in the House went against Matt Huffman on this is because they are hearing from taxpayers the way we are.
and they realized this could be a campaign issue. Think about it, if you wanted to challenge one of the House members, you could use this. They voted for $600 million for the billionaire Haslams for a football stadium in Cleveland. That would resonate in many parts of the state if you wanted to take out the incumbent. I think they’re worried. This failed by one vote in a House with a super majority Republicans, meaning Matt Huffman
almost could not corral that group. And I don’t think it’s going to go away. I’m not surprised by the way people responded. Thanks for all the responses. People hate this. They hate spending public money on tax on stadiums. Even though this is billed as a loan, taxpayers ultimately will be on the hook for revenue shortfalls and like we said, the infrastructure which the brands have managed to keep anybody from talking about.
Lisa (12:13.883)
Right, and if you look at that exit where you get off at the airport, I mean it’s hemmed in by railroad tracks on one side, I mean to reconfigure that is going to be a nightmare. I can’t even imagine how they’re going to do that.
Chris Quinn (12:25.745)
I think it’s been dishonest to not put this front and center. This should have been part of the plan. It’s not just we’re going to plop this enormous covered stadium that’s going to draw 60,000 people there. This is how we’ll get them in and out without impeding you getting to the airport to catch your flight. That’s been absent and it’s been mentioned a few times. but with what the legislature did in trying to prohibit that money being spent.
It tells you it’s a factor and we should be talking about it. It’s an interesting one. So appreciate the readers for weighing in. You’re listening to Today in Ohio. Speaking of Brown Stadium, is Mike Nawine shying away from his opposition to the state’s borrowing $600 million to help the Browns build that $2.4 billion stadium, Leila?
Leila (13:15.324)
No, not at all, really. If anything, Mike DeWine is getting louder about his opposition. On Thursday, he went on conservative talk radio and made it crystal clear that he thinks the House’s plan to borrow $600 million to help the Browns build this covered stadium is a really bad idea. The House plan would issue bonds backed by tax revenue from the stadium and the surrounding development, and the Browns owners would put in $1.2 billion of their own money.
in Cuyahoga County where they cover the other $600 million mostly through tourism taxes. And to sweeten the deal, the Browns would also front about $50 million into an investment account as a safety net if revenues fall short. But DeWine is not biting on this. He’s worried about the long-term cost. And with interest, he says the state’s share could balloon to nearly a billion dollars. And so instead, he’s pushing his plan, which has been that, you know,
that would double taxes on sports betting companies and it would help any pro sports team in Ohio, not just the Browns. And it would do it without racking up debt. no, he hasn’t technically threatened a veto, but his comments definitely crank up the pressure as budget talks heat up.
Chris Quinn (14:31.897)
The state keeps delaying the release of a financial analysis of whether the projections on the revenue from this stadium, the income taxes and a few other taxes that go to the state are enough to pay back these loans. I don’t know why it’s being delayed so much, but we suspect the legislators saw it. That’s why they made the Haslam’s put in 50 million into escrow, but 50 million is chump change when you’re talking about 600 or a billion. I think the wine...
Leila (14:57.12)
Right.
Chris Quinn (15:00.157)
with the infrastructure discussion may end up with the winning hand here. If he comes out and says, look, I’m vetoing this because it’s not 600 million. It’s really 1.6 billion because of the work we’re going to have to do to the roads up there to make this happen. My plan can pay for that. My plan would take care of this for the Haslums if we went ahead with it. But what where we’re headed now is we’re saddling taxpayers with way too much risk.
That seems like a winning play to me, except for the legislature, which is in the pocket of the sports betting companies. Let’s face it, we’ve said it. The sports betting companies have zero investment in Ohio. They just suck cash out. They don’t have people employed here. They don’t have brick and mortar things. They’re not paying their fair share. So they should pay this. This is a simple thing. And the only cost to the Haslams is if they wanted to start on their timetable, which is shovels in the ground, what, next year?
Leila (15:37.622)
Mm-hmm.
Chris Quinn (15:57.453)
then they would have to front the money. But they get paid back within about five years, I suspect. So how much do they want the money? Front the money, absorb a little bit of the cost of that, and you get paid scot-free. There’s no loans, there’s nothing to pay back. So it’s interesting that he’s talking strong. He may veto this. And then I don’t know if they have the votes to override that veto because of the politics here.
because of that close vote we saw in the House about paying for the infrastructure. Fascinating times. Matt Huffman isn’t as powerful as he thinks he is.
Leila (16:31.028)
Exactly.
Leila (16:35.382)
That’s right. mean, DeWine’s plan really makes so much sense. It doesn’t saddle taxpayers with any debt. He’s asking the sports betting industry, which has just exploded in the last couple of years, to pay more. It’s a user-based tax. It’s the companies making money off sports entertainment that would help fund sports infrastructure. That makes sense. And the average Ohio taxpayer, there’s nothing on their shoulders.
It’s just a much fairer way to do it and it avoids tying up any state money. So I hope that that prevails in this debate.
Chris Quinn (17:13.561)
All right, you’re listening to Today in Ohio. The mystery of the Ohio legislature taking away millions from a Cleveland Riverfront development got more interesting this week with a move by a lawyer for the project. Laura, what happened?
Laura (17:27.672)
Well, developer Tony George is asking the state legislature and Governor Mike DeWine’s office to retain any records about their decision to cancel the $3.5 million in state aid for that development that he and his son Bobby are spearheading in the flats. So the attorney’s name is Scott Pollins. He sent a request in a letter on Tuesday and he said he’s going to file a records request seeking evidence that legislative leaders revoke the money out of political retribution, not because of legal proceedings against Bobby George. That’s what a Senate
GOP spokesman said when we ask, of course, nobody’s pointing fingers saying so and so is the one who asked to remove the money and nobody’s saying much about it at all. The money was originally approved last year in support of this plan to build a thirty five million dollar three building restaurant and entertainment complex on the East Bank of the Flats. And Bobby George has led this project. His father is an investor. But then the Ohio Senate quietly, abruptly inserted language into the transportation bill, which OK.
and revoked that earmark.
Chris Quinn (18:29.559)
Yeah, and they claim it’s because of criminal charges that are pending, although no indictment’s been issued and you’re still innocent in this country until you’re proven guilty. I compared it to Intel. If the head of Intel got charged with something, they wouldn’t take their money back from Intel because they want the project. This money is supposed to be about what’s best for economic development, not the people getting it. I do think it’s been interesting how secret
Laura (18:32.364)
Right.
Chris Quinn (18:57.763)
They’ve all been about it. They refuse to say who made this call. And I don’t think people understand. A letter that says, we are warning you not to destroy any records, has a serious legal standing. If you destroy those records after getting notified of a potential lawsuit, if it goes to trial, the judge instructs the jury that you have to consider the worst possible situation.
Laura (18:57.976)
Mm-hmm.
Chris Quinn (19:26.199)
because they destroyed those records. So if the allegation is there was bribery or something, the jury has to accept that that’s what happened because they destroyed the records. It has huge weight when you get served with this. You cannot destroy anything or it harms you in court. So they claim no one’s ever served that kind of notice on the legislature before. So it’s interesting.
I don’t think this story is over. will eventually get to the bottom. What’s going on here?
Laura (19:54.701)
No.
Laura (19:58.658)
Well, the lawyer says that Matt Huffman, the speaker of the House, took this money away because he wanted to punish Tony George for financially supporting House Speaker Jason Stevens last session. Remember the back and forth between the warring factions of Republicans and Jason Stevens ended up the House Speaker not aligned with Matt Huffman. So that’s what Pullen’s letter was sent and it was sent to both Huffman and Rahm Eccal in the state House, or sorry, in the
Senate and DeWine, all sorts of other lawmakers and staff, it labels them as, quote, prospective defendants. And so, yeah, you’re right. They’re going to see what their records requests come back before they decide whether to file a lawsuit.
Chris Quinn (20:40.739)
We should point out they acknowledge they have absolutely no evidence of what they’re arguing. They’re basically saying, we’ve heard rumors that this is what happened, but they’ve officially served notice, which takes this up a notch. And this story will continue. The secrecy of the legislature behind this is inexcusable. How can you have a move like this and refuse to say who did it? I think what...
Laura (20:50.06)
Mm-hmm.
Chris Quinn (21:09.049)
what the Georges are doing will eventually ferret it out. You’re listening to Today in Ohio. Lisa, what did the Association of Ohio County Coroners have to say about the surprise move by the House in the budget to wipe them off the face of the earth? This was an Ohio House move born in complete secrecy without hearings or discussion. No one knew it was coming.
Lisa (21:33.295)
Yeah, they are totally shocked is what they said. Executive director of the Ohio State Coroners Association, David Corey says such a massive change without debate was very disappointing. They weren’t, you know, asked or advised of this or anything. So basically this house budget proposal would have county commissioners courts appoint their coroners to four year terms and no longer electing them. But here in Cuyahoga and also in Summit, ours are appointed.
So this would be 86 counties affected. Medina County Coroner Lisa Derenick says she’s concerned that the coroner’s position could fall victim to patronage. know, somebody asking for a favor and says, hey, let me be coroner. She says coroners have to remain independent, especially in cases where there are suspected overdoses, foul play or abuse. Lorraine County Coroner Frank Miller concurs. says, you know, coroners.
that are appointed could be pressured to sway death investigation results of those who die in jail or in police custody. He’s a former Cuyahoga coroner under our old regime. He says an election makes them more immune to pressure from county officials.
Chris Quinn (22:43.287)
Okay, but what flies in the face of that is we have two appointed medical examiners in Cuyahoga and Summit and they’re quite professional and we’ve never heard a hint of politics being played. But the point is that nobody got to make these the case for this. They never had the chance to come in and say, hey, we think it’s a bad idea because of politics. You can make strong arguments that you should appoint the coroners of the medical examiners.
You can make arguments against it. But the House, in secret, we don’t even know where it came from once again, just decided to end more than a century of tradition and wipe it out. It’s preposterous that you would make a decision like this through a budget without a single hearing. And I think that’s what we’re hearing across the state. What? How do you do something like this? This is a authoritarian government, man. This is not the way it works in America.
Lisa (23:17.499)
Mm-hmm.
Chris Quinn (23:40.183)
You propose legislation, you hold hearings, people get to come in and offer information, experts get to talk about the pros and cons, and then you make informed decisions. That’s not what the Ohio legislature does anymore. They’re just not having the doing the homework. They’re making ridiculous rash decisions that are infuriating people.
Lisa (24:01.937)
Well, on the other side of the coin, I mean, there are some medical examiners like the Summit County ME investigator, Gary Gunther. says actually running for office is really, really expensive. It’s really time consuming. And he says they could actually, know, elections can actually deter candidates. And it’s really already tough to recruit coroners at this point.
Chris Quinn (24:21.431)
Yeah, there’s a lot of reasons that it’s worth thinking about. I do think that our medical examiner’s office is more professional than the coroner’s offices we had in the past. So it’s been a good move for Cuyahoga County. Tom Gilson has put together a pretty good place, but it doesn’t. None of that matters. The ends don’t justify the means here. People who have a stake in this debate should be heard.
and they never were heard, except on cleveland.com where we’ve put the story together and they’re making their comments quite clear. You’re listening to Today in Ohio. We reported on an embarrassing backlog at City Hall in the lead paint cleanup effort. Is it fixed, Leila?
Leila (25:08.414)
Yeah, it actually does appear to be fixed. And this happened way faster than anyone expected. Cleveland had this backlog of about 1200 lead safe applications piling up, and it was a real problem. It was supposed to take six months to sort through it all. But after some public pressure and a lot of internal hustle, the city cleared it in just about a month. They polled volunteers from all over City Hall, people from the health department, human resources, even the mayor’s office, and trained them
to help process this mountain of paperwork. So now the backlog is gone and staff can get back to actually enforcing the city’s lead safe law and helping landlords fix the problems. But clearing the backlog doesn’t mean the lead pain problem itself is solved, of course. Councilwoman Rebecca Moore said it best when she said the program still isn’t making the impact it needs for Cleveland’s kids. Right now, about half of the city’s rental units are certified lead safe. That is progress.
But it’s not enough, especially when the biggest risks are in older, more deteriorated homes that aren’t always getting the attention they need. The mayor did make the rules tougher recently requiring landlords to get more thorough lead risk assessments instead of the quick and easy tests that were missing a lot of problems. And the city now has new enforcement tools like civil fines for landlords who don’t follow the rules. But the next big question is whether Cleveland sticks with the current game plan or shifts to a new strategy that
targets better, you the homes most likely to poison kids, places with old windows and doors and porches where lead dust builds up over time. So yeah, this paperwork backlog is fixed, but the hard part, actually protecting kids from lead poisoning is still very, very much a work in progress.
Chris Quinn (26:45.593)
Right.
Chris Quinn (26:54.583)
Well, and let’s remember that some of the places that were declared lead safe, kids got poisoned there. So it’s a joke. This program for 30 years, Cleveland has just failed miserably. This is a bad program. The legislation that created this was made from a tower of babble and it’s a disaster. It’s not working. Things are worse now than when it started. Need to throw it out and just start cleaning houses. One house at a time. Every house you clear, figure out what the formula is. How many kids
go through a Cleveland house in 50 years. And you can then say that many kids have just been protected from lead poisoning. Do another house, you double the number. Just start. They have $100 million and they’re not cleaning any houses. I don’t think it’s fair to the landlords to say, you own it now, it’s your problem when they didn’t create it. It’s a community problem. We could do it. You could create a training program for Cleveland residents to become contractors. Pull out the trim.
Pull out the doors, pull out the windows, train them to replace them. You could probably attract a window manufacturer to Cleveland with the idea that you’re gonna pretty much replace every window in the city. You could do it and we don’t think big. Instead, it’s this nonsense. This is nonsense. This is not going to solve the problem. We should start over. Right here, right now. I wish this would be an issue in the council races this year because unless council rises up, rips this apart,
and moves forward with the bold idea, kids are going to continue to get poisoned. And it is the biggest threat to the future of Cleveland.
Leila (28:28.96)
I agree with that. And the millions of dollars sitting in that coalition fund, those are great resources to tap into. it’s time to start using them aggressively and strategically in targeting the places where kids are most at risk. We got to do more than make rental units just technically compliant. You have to make them really safe. So if Cleveland can double down right now, we could finally turn the corner on lead poisoning. And its focus, though, has to
be, you know, we need the political will and a real commitment to finish the job here.
Chris Quinn (29:03.245)
We need a leader. What we need is a Tom Hays or Jane Platten, somebody that can come in, be organized and march this thing forward. We don’t have the leader to get it done. Somebody that can focus on the details, be methodical and march forward. We need somebody that will galvanize that, get it done. The only thing that matters here is the results. Everything else is just noise. And that’s all we’ve dealt with on this since the beginning is the noise.
You’re listening to Today in Ohio. The Cleveland Foundation persuaded university hospitals to move a medical center to a new innovative building in the Midtown neighborhood. Laura, why is that location ideal for the patients this center serves?
Laura (29:48.13)
This is the Cleveland Foundation’s Midtown Collaboration Center, which is this big new kind of neighborhood central meeting point right near the Cleveland Foundation’s headquarters at East 66th Street in Cleveland. It houses academic and arts organizations, a brewery. So it really is a gathering place and not just offices, but this will really be able to bring health resources close to home for people who are living with diabetes and obesity.
kind of what we were talking about at the top of this program about SNAP, that there are nutrition and exercise consultation. There’s an endocrinologist, diabetes care, education specialist, and a nutritionist. So you’re not just going to go there for doctor’s appointment. Hopefully you’re going to go there, be part of the neighborhood, and interact with these people and learn about how best to take care of either your disease or your body or both. Because diabetes has huge serious health complications, including leg amputation, kidney disease,
depression, fatty liver disease, cardiovascular disease, and it’s the seventh leading cause of death in the United States. In Kyga County, 13 % of the population has diabetes. An additional 33 % have pre-diabetes. So this is a huge issue. And obviously, anything we can do to help people get healthier is a good thing.
Chris Quinn (31:07.853)
I’ve taken a tour of this building, which hasn’t had its grand opening yet. I think it’s coming any day. and it is a fascinating experiment by the Cleveland foundation to bring kind of disparate groups together in a way where they’ll interact with each other all the time. And I don’t think there’s another building like it in Cleveland or probably in any city. would take somebody like the Cleveland foundation to invest in it.
But as people see more and more of what’s going on there, I think they’re going to be very impressed. And this was a big get. And it just makes so much sense to put it in a neighborhood where you have problems that can be served so people can walk there to be treated. Great news and kind of a visionary idea from the foundation.
You’re listening to today in Ohio. That’s it for a week of news. Thanks Lisa. Thanks Laila. Thanks Laura. Thank you for being with us. Will be back on Monday talking about the news.