Berea Deserves Better
2 November 2011
Updated on Nov. 6th. Read the update at the conclusion of this essay, or click here.
– by Mike Murray
I seldom agree with Plain Dealer political editorials. But such is the case with respect to a specific assertion within the PD’s Berea mayoral endorsement: Berea does deserve better.
Those who know me (or have read my sundry commentaries over the past decade) know that I have no affection for Cyril Kleem. I believe him to be the beneficiary of considerable help from Democrat party honchos — including, perhaps, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Bill Mason. It’s conceivable that Kleem began his career in politics as one of the many ponies in Mason’s stable of young hopefuls. Or maybe he was a protégé of former Cuyahoga County Democratic Party Chairman Jimmy Dimora, or of Brooklyn’s then-kingpin (now deceased) Mayor John Coyne.
Whatever the case, Kleem cut his government-service teeth in positions that appeared to be created specifically for him. What benefits accrued to the citizens of Berea, relative to the cost of his compensation during that period, is subject to debate. (There are those who believe that Kleem spent the bulk of his time serving Downtown Cleveland party bosses, rather than Bereans.)
Regardless, the “community development” experience netted Kleem a measure of gravitas, and enabled him to run for our city’s highest elective office. His campaign four years ago was extremely well funded. From where the cash came — and to whom Kleem might have been consequently beholden — is a mystery (to me, anyway).
Then there is the matter of Kleem’s endorsement by the News Sun. There is only one word that adequately describes the Sun’s role in the 2007 mayoral race: cheerleader. (Okay, two: “disgraceful” also applies.) The paper’s over-the-top endorsement editorials, coupled with its sale of front-page ad space to the Kleem campaign — in the issue published just prior to the general election — amounted to a travesty of journalism. (The paper has acquitted itself no better, by the way, in this year’s campaign. See: Sun Shines on Cuyhoga Dems and End Anonymous Editorials To those who still consider the Sun to be an objective source for news and analysis: I’ve got some terrific land in Florida I’d like to speak to you about.)
The upshot is that Kleem wasn’t so much elected Mayor of Berea as he was installed in the position by powerful (or what passes for “powerful,” around these parts) political forces.
I concede that, during the last four years, Kleem has done a fair job as mayor. If I were to grade him, I’d give him a C+, maybe even a B-. But his documented emotional and physical setbacks are deeply troubling. Perhaps he is now healthy. Perhaps he is not. But he’s had serious problems in the past. Problems that he did not handle well.
And, again, I am troubled by the way in which he attained office in the first place. Simply put, I don’t care for the way behind-the-scenes manipulators have sought to control Berea politics. And Cyril Kleem, it seems to me, is the poster boy for those kinds of shenanigans.
On the other hand, many Bereans know next to nothing about Kleem’s opponent: Gene Zacharyasz. Yes, yes, I know — his family’s ties to Berea go back generations. He points that out in nearly all of his campaign literature. But this isn’t a seniority contest. (If it were, we’d simply locate the adult Berean whose genealogy traces back the furthest, and appoint him or her mayor.) Frankly, I’m growing weary of the “I’m more Berean because I was born here, raised here, attended school here,” etc. argument.
My retort: I’m a Berean by choice, not by chance. I was neither born here nor attended grade- middle- or high-school here. (I did earn degrees — bachelor’s and master’s — from Baldwin-Wallace College. But I began study there while residing elsewhere.) I am a native of Cleveland. Cleveland proper. But, over a quarter-century ago, I elected to move here. And for most of the time between then and now, I have called Berea home. I am proud of my affiliation with both Cleveland and Berea.
And I acknowledge that it’s reasonable for other folks to be similarly proud of their roots, and to express their deep affection for Berea — or for any other town. But I don’t buy the notion that lengthy generational tenure is a major qualification (or any qualification at all, really) for election to public office. As a consequence, I find Zacharyasz’ implication that his family’s long affiliation with Berea should encourage voters to support him a little off-putting.
Neither is membership in the Chamber of Commerce a form of “community service.” Business owners join such organizations because doing so is good for their companies’ bottom lines. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. My BA and MBA degrees are testament to my belief in the legitimacy of the pursuit of business success. To me, “profit” is not a dirty word.
But don’t try to sell me on the notion that membership in business-oriented community organizations constitutes a form of public service, or that it imbues a candidate with any particular credential for elected office.
That said, successful business ownership certainly does provide valuable managerial experience to executive-branch governmental officials. I think we’d all be better off if our elected officials — particularly those seeking to serve as mayors, governors, and presidents — had some real-world experience at the senior level. And even running a small business (sometimes especially running a small business, with every aspect under your constant purview) qualifies.
All of which argues in favor of Zacharyasz. What argues against him is obvious: A complete lack of governmental experience. To my knowledge, he has never served on city council or worked for the City of Berea in any capacity. And, just as there is something to be said for private-sector business experience, there surely is much to be said for public-sector governmental experience — especially if one wishes to serve as a city’s highest elected official.
Finally, there is the matter of the candidates’ respective lists of resident endorsements. Together, they comprise quite a compilation of Who’s Who in Berea. During the run-up to the primary election, I was annoyed by the list distributed by the Kleem campaign (see: Buzzards Return to Berea ). The notion — put forth in the flyer — that Kleem was the victim of “dirty politics” was beyond the pale. It was also disturbing that among those listed as Kleem supporters was the immediate-past editor of the News Sun — the very person responsible for the paper’s previous (and, perhaps, present) Kleem favoritism.
And then, recently, attached to my front door was a similar list of names of Bereans who support Zacharyasz. I was relieved to see that the flyer did not stoop to the Kleem campaign’s level, in that it did not whine about “the other side’s” tactics (although a little complaining about the News Sun’s editorial behavior would have been justified). But what did jump out at me were the names included on the list. Some people who supported Kleem four short years ago clearly do not any more. What happened to sour them on Cyril? Many listed are staunch Democrats, as is Kleem. And many are (or, at least, have been in the past) on very good terms with the county’s Democratic leadership — as, one supposes, Kleem is as the party’s endorsed incumbent. So what gives?
Even stranger is the assortment of names. People who have a history as bitter political adversaries now identify themselves as united in support of Zacharyasz. Bizarre. I know that politics makes for strange bedfellows, but I still find this to be a fascinating turn of events. One lately needs a scorecard to keep track of the players — and their current affiliations in Berea.
Bottom line: Neither candidate, as the Plain Dealer suggests, is perfect.
Cyril Kleem represents much of what I detest about how the political game is played. He achieved office — in my judgement — via a royal road, one paved by people who wanted someone friendly to their interests at the helm of Berea government. And his health issues (physical and emotional) should be real concerns — even to his supporters. Still, as policy wonks go, Kleem is competent. Absent any malfeasance of which we are not aware, he has done a reasonably acceptable job as mayor.
Gene Zacharyasz is a political rookie. And rookies don’t usually start at the top. (I know, I know: being mayor of Berea hardly represents the pinnacle of political power. But it’s the top elective post in town.) Perhaps a stint on city council would have been a more appropriate place to begin. Still, Zacharyasz’ business ownership gives him managerial experience. And it doesn’t appear that he’s the toady of any outside forces looking to pull the strings in Berea (although I confess that a few of the names on his supporters list give me pause).
Opportunities for significant political change infrequently present themselves in Berea. Zacharyasz reflects such an opportunity. But he is unproven (and his outside alliances, if any, are unknown). Kleem has done okay as mayor, but he is accompanied by plenty of baggage. I won’t try to influence your vote by revealing mine. But I will say that, either way, I will have to hold my nose to some degree while marking my ballot.
Copyright © 2011 Michael F. Murray — All rights reserved.
Update: I had intended, when I posted this essay (on Nov 2nd) to refrain from offering an endorsement in this year’s mayoral race. But I have since reconsidered.
I now deem Cyril Kleem to be too dysfunctional to serve. As a consequence, I believe Berea voters should deny him a second term.
Yes, I did give his administration a passing grade in my original essay. But I now conclude that the credit for that rightfully belongs to other city officials — who have persevered under trying conditions.
I retain concerns about Gene Zacharyasz’ lack of governmental experience (and also about some of the people with whom he seems affiliated). Nevertheless, I now believe him to be the better choice.
I will, therefore, be voting for Zacharyasz for Mayor of Berea on November 8th.
