McNamara releases statement on Edna Brown announcing she will run for Ohio Senate
This in via e-mail:
McNamara Issues Statement On Edna Brown’s Announcement She Will Run For Senate
Toledo, OH – Toledo City Council President Joe McNamara issues the following statement responding to Edna Brown’s announcement that she will seek the 11th District seat in the Ohio State Senate in 2010:
“Representative Brown is an accomplished public servant who I respect a great deal. But I believe that new energy and fresh perspective are needed in Columbus to confront the unprecedented economic challenges we’re facing.”
McNamara announced his intention to form a State Senate exploratory committee on Friday, November 20 and will make a decision about entering the race before the end of January.
First elected to Toledo City Council At-Large in a 2006 special election, McNamara was chosen as Council President by his colleagues in a unanimous, bipartisan vote in July 2009. In November, he was re-elected to City Council, receiving the most votes of any candidate on the Toledo ballot. McNamara is also a member of the Executive and Central Committees of the Lucas County Democratic Party.
For those of you not familiar with Representative Brown; in 2001 Edna Brown was re-elected to Toledo City Council for District 4, it was her third term and she was 61 years old at the time. Before she was sworn in, she was appointed to the Ohio House, replacing Jack Ford who stepped down to become Toledo’s Mayor. She then ran for election in the House and for re-election. She is now termed out from running for another term in the Ohio House, which is why she is running for this Senate seat, current Ohio Senator Teresa Fedor is termed out from this seat.
December 1st, 2009 at 7:51 pmAnd Rep. Peter Ujvagi is also termed out from his house seat … a house seat that is included in the Senate District 11…
Oh, how interesting this will be!
December 1st, 2009 at 8:27 pmHow Boring,
The musical chairs that politicians in our city plays drowns out new and innovative ideas from our exceptional youth and young professionals who come from Toledo. We have lost tons of tremendous young talent and have gained little due to the “senior” nature of LCDP politics.
December 1st, 2009 at 8:35 pmMaggie, that’s true but he hasn’t formally announced his intentions yet. So, it could be Brown, Ujvagi and McNamara if he makes it formal in January.
December 1st, 2009 at 8:45 pmHave to agree with Maroon…boring. Bunch of career politicians or those aspiring to be who can’t do anything else.
December 1st, 2009 at 9:06 pmI couldn’t agree more with Maroon Tiger.
I don’t know why more citizens are not fed up with politicians changing positions over and over again. We had the same thing this past election with Steve Steel on City Council. I don’t know how much more of this I can take!
December 1st, 2009 at 9:06 pmAgree Maroon Tiger. Although if they beat each other up in the primary that would be a little fun to watch!
December 1st, 2009 at 11:27 pmSure we have these term limits in place to make sure don’t get career politicians. That’s worked out real well.
December 2nd, 2009 at 8:07 amBoth parties do it, at times they encourage it. You can argue it two ways, a) you want to keep them in the General Assembly since they do have legislative experience and connections or b) musical chairs violates the spirit of term limits.
December 2nd, 2009 at 9:51 amSeveral years, ago I wrote our Toledo reps in Columbus about finding a way to connect I-75 south of Findlay with State Route 315 in Columbus. This would be a shorter way to Columbus, and a more direct way that would avoid all the traffic lights on U.S. 23 from Delaware into Columbus. I did not receive one reply. That’s why I could care less about the political chair moving done by these people. To me, they’re useless and a waste of my taxpayer money.
December 2nd, 2009 at 12:01 pmToledoJim – at the risk of getting blasted…I feel the need (want) to respond. In part because I have the freedom of having not received your email. There are several problems with the “fix” that at this point would have needed to be fixed 10 -15 years ago that cannot be fixed now. There is no excuse for ODOT allowing the communities north of 270 to put that many lights on US 23. (I think its 23 lights in 32 miles) Access roads should have been required with the new developments. I certainly understand and appreciate the need for local government control; however transportation dollars are State and Federal for a reason, regional and statewide considerations must override local considerations on specific routes. At this point, I’m not certain what we can do. As much as it “hurts” to say this, Michigan might offer the only fix available at this point. We could eliminate some of the lights by replacing them with what I call “Michigan turns”. That would eliminate cross traffic. I will talk to ODOT and the Transportation Committee. Interestingly, Representative Ujvagi chaired the Transportation Sub Committee of the Finance Committee, if the post came a few months earlier, we could have had an inside track from someone who drives it weekly. Although, I do think that we missed the opportunity to effectively fix the problem years ago, maybe we can influence upgrades in the future.
December 2nd, 2009 at 9:55 pmThank you Barbara for your response. It’s the only one I have received. I won’t blast you for that. I’m familiar with “Michigan” turns — just don’t call them that in Columbus. LOL! You know how Michigan is regarded in Columbus. BTW, GO BUCKS!
December 4th, 2009 at 3:17 pmSo true – Buckeye Turns would make more sense…at least there round…O-H
December 4th, 2009 at 6:20 pmBarbara – what exactly is a “Michigan turn”?
December 4th, 2009 at 8:35 pm