Do you want to be an American idiot?
Solob be back on seven hundred WW Man, We've got everything going on all at the same time. We'll begin with this story. This morning, federal judge has allowed Ohio, the Buckeye State, to begin transferring unclaimed funds starting first the year of finance at new Brown Stadium and all of these millions, if not hundreds of millions, and now we're into the billions of dollars when it comes to
unclaimed funds at Ohio. There's a lawsuit that was threatened by Mark dan and that has now come to fruition. It's going to challenge this US mister. Judge denied a preliminary injunction. It said Ohio's really don't face a reparable harm since they can still claim the money through twenty thirty six. However, he also rejected the state's motion to dismiss this case entirely. So the judge said, hey, it's
up to me to determine if the law's constitutional. He's not here to decide if it's a good idea or not. And he may have a ruling in this as early as Tuesday on whether this preliminary injunction will be granted on this who brought the case forward along with Mark Dan As Jeff Cross to the Dan Law firm in Cleveland. He's lead council. Jeff, welcome, How are you good?
How are you today?
I'm doing fine. A lot to unpack here as the state tries to move like two billion dollars up to two billion on claim funds into an account of finance, stadiums, cultural projects, stuff like that six hundred million for the Browns, Cincinnati, Columbus and others are probably gonna get some but let's start here. The judge denied your request for the injunction, but allow the case to move forward. So what's the strategy here for you moving forward?
Well, the case is the court noted the case does have merit, so the case will continue and we ultimately will hope to prevail in this case because we think
our constitutional arguments are pretty strong here. It's fundamental to what we all understand then, what the constitution protects, which is your private property right and gives you the opportunity to object when the state tries to take your property, which is not happening here because the state doesn't give anybody notice that they're seeing people's property, putting it in a what was supposed to be a lost and found account, but now, as it turned out, is going to be
used as a slush fund to give out money to various projects of the legislature.
Okay, so we'll unpack this a little bit here too. Let's start with achievement laws. Obviously there are people who will not claim funds despite public notices. Will get to that element in just a second, but typically a state and I think, o, hi, it's like ten years. Basically, if you don't claim something in ten years, it reverts back to the state because they just assume you don't care or you're dead. Is that the biggest legal hurdle you got to jump over.
There's a lot of challenges to what the state is doing here. First, a lot of people don't know that their property is being seized, and there's really no legitimate or practical way to protect yourself. So every bank account that you own, whether it's a savings account or money market account, or a life insurance policy or even a safe deposit back with some personal belongings that may not have economic value but might have personal value to you.
You can't protect yourself from the state seizing that property, liquidating the property, and then you know, turning it over to this slush fund. And we had a gentleman testify the other day, a gentleman from Germany who had this very experience happened him. His entire retirement account, which was held at Charles Schwab, was confiscated by the State of California, liquidated without his knowledge, and he ultimately received only a fraction of what he was owned.
But there's a justification here for dormant money. I mean, if it sits unclaimed for a decade, that suggests owners have forgotten it, moved without affording their information, died without their errors knowing about it, which is unfortunate for sure. But do we do you just suggest that this money sits there in perpetuity.
No.
I think what the High Supreme Court has been clear about is unclaim funds doesn't mean abandoned property. The High Supreme Court a unanimous decision, when when does that happen? Often right, in a unanimous decision not that long ago, said that the unclaim funds is not abandoned. People simply don't know about it. And then the state admitted on the stand repeatedly over and over again. They do not send any notice to anybody. So they're taking people's property
and liquidating it without their knowledge. So you can't abandon something you don't have notice, gotcha.
On the other hand, we know, I mean, this is probably one of the few things they still do, Jeff, is advertisements and newspapers where there's court decisions that you have to publicly notify people, so you put an ad in all the newspaper in each of the eighty eight counties. That's, you know, technologically back in the day that especially. I don't know if we still do that or not. You could probably tell me better, But you know, we have
social media, we have public service campaigns. I mean, isn't there a duty on the part of the person who holds an account or an adult to be aware of what the law is regarding this and therefore be informed. I mean, how far should the state go to make sure someone is dead or incapacitated or simply doesn't care. You can only do so much. And I guess when I look at public notices and newspapers that seems to satisfy the courts.
Why not the sun Well, two things there, One, the US Supreme Court has been repeatedly in multiple cases, very clear. It is the state's duty, not the individual's duty. It is the state's duty if they want to take your property, notify them. The other real problem here is that the data is bad, and we had plenty of people testify even the state testified that the data is not valid in a lot of cases. Isn't balid. They don't have
zip code, they don't have correct addresses. There's people in foreign countries and other states of the United States, Wisconsin, New York, all over the country that publication in Tyhoga County or Hamilton County or Franklin County doesn't reach those folks. So they have no notice at all that your property has been seized by the state of Ohio. The property is going to be liquidated and handed over.
Okay, what the level of notification you think is constitutionally required here?
Then, well, the Supreme Court has been very clear on that too. It has to be something that's calculated to reach that person. So if your data is bad and you're not sending out any notice whatsoever, I can pretty safely say that there's no notice whatsoever.
Yeah, I mean, you have what potentially thirty five thousand claimants living abroad alone would never see those notices. In this day and age where you can do your work from anywhere around the world for that matter, that's problematic. They'd have to change that.
And I'll say this, there are plenty of municipalities and fire departments and all kinds of local governments across the state of Ohio. They have money's in the unclaimed fund. You can't tell me the State of Ohio doesn't know where the city of Cleveland, City Cincinnati is physically located, where send the checks. They can do that. They could send them notice and tell them that the property is about to be liquidated.
And we're not doing that right now. Just to be clear, they do nothing. Accept here's the website. Find it for yourself. Correct, gotcha? Gotcha? If you could point to other I guess precedent. And when it comes to notifying people, I mean I get notifications all the time for well things like class action lawsuits. I get a postcard that says you want to be part of this class et cetera. Somehow they can find me there. But the state can in this case.
Believe me, if the state and if you owe taxes to the state, of Ohio they were trying to. I can't imagine why in this case where they owe you money, they're not looking for you, right right?
He is Jeff Crossman. He is lead counsel in this case against the State of Ohio, the unclaimed funds case. It's going to fun on all the public Stadia Cleveland first with three hundred million or six hundred million. I guess I should say out of this up to two
billion dollars unclaimed funds. So if you have an unclaimed a case, or you have unclaimed funds, whether it's a dollar or a million dollars, you have to go to the state website to check your unclaim funds and find them for yourself, as opposed to the state doing due diligence to try and find you. That's the crux of the argument he's making in the judge of federal judges rule that the case can move forward with some guardrails
in place. There it's I think it was you, or it was Mark dan or I had honi you compared it to unclaimed funds to a dog shelters website. You know, I got I think just within the last year I went on and got like because of this case. Actually, I think about four hundred dollars on claim funds I founded or my name and my brother did the same. But the website, I mean, I didn't have a problem navigating.
But he said, it's just like the website itself is terrible, and if it's bad, then it causes people to maybe not look for their funds.
The website is pretty rudimentary. We had a film and tip right the other day who handles e commerce for BMW internationally, and you know, he's got an IT expert, and consider's some fundamental flaws in the way the database captures data, sources data, and spits it back to you. One of the things we identified originally was one of the plaintetfs in the case. His name is pretty common. It's Codd Butler. If you put that name into the database, it fits back a thousand and it cuts off there.
There might be ten thousand Todd Butler's in there. You'll never know whether or not those other ones are in there because it stops giving you results after number one thousand. Then the state admitted that every day, So there's just really no way to know what property you truly have in that whole front there's no way to search it all.
Imagine a government website or something the government not working properly. Jeff, I'm shocked.
Well, we're here to try to correct the process that was the purpose of the laws. We're not anti stadium construction. We're not anti Cleveland Browns were all sports here in dan law. But we do think that the government should act constitutionally, and we do think that they should employe some better safeguards to make sure people's rights are protected.
Yeah, and I think it's important FACETA too. This is not about going after the Cleveland Browns or the fund. I mean, look at it this way. So I think someone made the accusation. This is about opposing public funding for stadiums and billionaire stadiums rather than property rights. But would you be in the same position if it were funding schools, hospital something, all those lies.
Well unclaimed funds. The way they're doing it is unconstitutional, So you know our position is constitutionally, this doesn't make any sense if it was a public purpose, a true public purpose like building a school or building a fire station, for example, that has a much more, much stronger justification than in this case. Because it is money being used it's a taking for a non public purpose.
Is there there is a problem there too, Jeff?
Is there a way you'd be satisfied? I mean, are you posted using unclan funds for a public person purposes generally, or is it's problematic just the stadium funding, or is there a way to you, for you and your clients or and your planing to those who brought the suit here for them to be satisfied.
Well, there are two constitutional issues here. One is the purpose of it taking, which you've identified, and secondly is the notice in the due process we need to have a a public purpose and be they have to improve the new process safeguards here they don't exist right now.
Again, Jeff Crossman's here from the Dan Law firm. He's the lead counsel in this case brought against the State of Ohio, the unclaimed funds case that we've talked about here that would fund stadiums across Ohio. The only problem is it's coming out of unclaimed funds and after ten
years that money would revert back to the state. And he's saying, there's just not enough notification in place, safeguards in place to make sure that your whole and that you get to get your money simply because the state would rather you not. There's a lot of entities would do that too. Right now, the way the lost hands, if money left dormant for ten plus years is presumed to abandon. I guess the question is should the state be able to react unclaimed funds? And we're talking about
what makes that constitutionally acceptable? This morning on the show, where do you think this goes in the next Well, now I think too, didn't I say a Tuesday? I believe it's a day a judge should make a decision. Here he said, you confidence this is going to be Ford.
The judge made a decision on the Pulomerian junction. Now we're moving forward on the case and we're going to decide whether we follow an appeal. And by the way, I should note that when the state amended the statute, it automatically created a complic of interest between the state
and yourself. You know, think about say you know your investment account at Cheryl Schwab, if Charles Schwab now had an incentive not to tell you how much money was in the account or or what they were doing with the money, and that if you don't contact them in a certain amount of time, they can just take your money. We would all fundamentally agree that that's what we would call indezzlement. And essentially what's going on here the state
now has a conflict of interest. They don't have any incentive to tell you that the money is there in the ways about protecting yourself. So, uh, it's a real problem.
Yeah, it seems to be. You know, you laid out a very very good dynamic case as to why the court should side with you and the plaintiffs in this case simply because the lack of notification in the website is terrible. My last name Sloan, not terribly uncommon, but I could see if your last name is Smith or something that if I'm not able to see and find exactly the you know, Jeff Smith that's on there, and there's probably thousands in the state of Ohio, that's problematic.
I mean, even if I want to find my money and that's my common name, it's going to be difficult to do so. And that's part of this lawsuit and rightly so that's exactly right, all right, So timeline here is now Judges hearing this is probably going to move forward in this case. Do you think the state eventually settles with this? Are you looking for a settlement or just an outright I mean, what what happens to the stadium funding model if you win?
Well, that's an open question. I mean that was That's why we argued that it was safer to keep the money where it is until we litigate the merits of the case. And I think at the end of the day, we're still optimistic that we're going to prevail here. And if that's the case, then this money, this half a billion dollars or more has left the State of Ohio's coffers. It's going to be taxpayers that have to put back that money.
Yeah, Jeff, all the best. Thanks for chepping on this morn now. You're extremely busy, but I appreciate taking time out to chat here. Jeff Crossmow, the Dan Law firm, lead counsel in this case, All the best, You have a great dable chat again. Thanks again, man, I appreciate you. I've got some time here maybe to talk about this. So, I don't know if you've checked the Unclaimed fun site. I have, and as I said, found like four hundred bucks or something like that. I thought it was pretty
easy process myself on my name. Okay, this is me here, Boom. But I have a common but not uncommon name. If you have a very common name, I don't know if you found it extremely difficult to navigate this site or not. As I said, I didn't, but your results may vary.
I don't know.
I'm kind of torn on this, but I tend to lean in this one towards more towards the state, and not that I want people to lose their money, But I don't know. After ten years, seems to me, with all of the information out there, you know, check all you gotta do is check this website. Now, it seems to me that that is on you. Ten years, you don't know that that money's out there. How far? How far should the state go to try and get that
money back to you? Now, I think two things here are important that the state would have to simply notify you somehow, I send you a postcard or whatever it might be, to a reasonable attempt to contact you. I mean, I get contacted by people I don't want contact contacting me all the time. They can find me, but the state can't. That's problematic. And as he said, if you have a common name, it's difficult to navigate the website.
That strike too, But I think if the state where to change those two elements, that to me seems like it would satisfy the claim that they're trying to hold on the money. And you can see that right, there's incentive for the state to hold your cash in an unclaimed account because now it's going to go to fund pet projects that lawmakers will definitely line up to try and get that quote unquote free money, not free, but quote unquote free money in order to well build something
nice to get votes. I'm the guy who got the new Cleveland Stadium. I'm the one who got Pai Course Stadium. I'm the one that got GABP made whole again and remodeled. So there's tremendous incentive for the state here. But we'll get your thoughts onto the unclaimed funds thing. And like I said, I tend to look at and go all right, I think you fix a website and make a concerned effort, do your due diligence and trying to locate someone with those funds, then that's probably the best you can do.
Outside of the public notices in the website your thoughts five one, three, seven, four, nine hundred. The big one talkback be the iHeartRadio app. You can get me there. If you're listening to the stream through your phone, We'll get do that. We'll get news. We've got weather moving in all sorts of moving parts this morning here on the Sconsolon Show on seven hundred w plony here seven hundred WLW. I I've got their news. Got through some
other stuff. And last half hour I had Jeff Crossman on Dan Law from lead Counselors's lawsuit against the State of Ohio for unclaimed funds to finance well Cleveland Brown Stadium. But let's face it, it's going to finance a redo of great American ballpark money for pay Corpse Stadium, and I would think it's going to be a critical funding source for a new arena. If they can get this done, I would think that a new arena is going to be fast tracked here in Cincinnati, and not just in
c but across the state of Ohio. The problem is, is this unclaimed funds thing. Is Jeff Crossman issuing with the Dan Law firmers arguing that we just don't notify people well enough in advance, and I think that's olally true. I don't think I've ever gotten thinking, hey, you've got unclaimed funds. You're just supposed to know where the website is for other things. I get notifications, I get mail,
I get email. Somehow they can find me, but the government can't, which backs up the claim that this is now going to be even worse when it comes to onclim funds, and that they're going to make it harder for you to get your money. And the website is like I said, I did, I didn't have a problem with it, but if you have a common last name, apparently it's a bit of a nightmare you clean those
two things up. I think it's a it's a go simply because I mean, l's say, you know, if you don't have an interest in finding money that's there for you, I mean, how far how much notification should we give you? It's pretty much common knowledge at this point that the website is out there. You have to you have to have an interest in finding that money to begin with. Let me get to Tammy and Cincinnati on seven hundred WW discussle and Joe Tammy appreciate holding what's up?
Hi let's have a comment where I work at a small business. Every year we go through the credits that we owe to people and we have to try and track them down and pay them back because if we hold onto that money after a year, we have to send it to the states. And my question is, if we put in all the time and effort to try and find these people and we can't find them, and we send the money to the states, why is the state entitled to that money and why wouldn't it revert.
That tough go back to the tach Well, how you distribute that? Does it go back to the general fund? But if it goes to general fund, then the lawmakers was to spend it on something else. At least it's earmarked for I guess something that makes sense. You could hear market. I suppose for a bunch of different things, schools and whatnot. But this is a way to remedy the cost of stadiums and not lean back on taxpayers. Largely because of what happened in Cincinnati back in the ninety.
But why wouldn't like the small business that I work for, why shouldn't they get that money back?
They put forth the.
Effort to try and find the people. Yeah, should they have to turn it over to the state.
Right, the state eventually gets that money. Well, I think it also gets back to now there's incentive for small businesses to go. Hey, you know, if we pretend that we're looking for these people, I mean, you make a case of the state. I totally understand your argument there. Yeah, Tammy, thanks for checking in this morning. Real quick over to Mason and Frank on the big one.
Hey, Frank, morning, I have a sort of a humor story about unclaimed funds.
About four years ago. I thought, I'm going to take.
Them look it up and see if I can.
Find anything, because I always if I get some money from somebody, I'll give a story of it to the church. So I go on and there was about twenty five dollars somewhere around there that was owed.
To me from unclaimed funds.
So I applied for it, and in about three weeks I get a check for three cents. I'm not kidding, it was three cents, so they said, so they spent fifty cents to send it to me. Then they need and then they did three follow up letters telling me to cast the check, which I was not going to ever to cast that check I'm keeping.
I'm going to keep it.
And needless to say, I did not donate one cent to the church.
Well you could have, would be more than tithing, though you'd have to a fraction of a cent there. But what happened to the twenty five bucks?
Uh?
They kept the rest of it for incidental charges of some kind. So I end up with three cents check and I still have it.
That's why I never I get I'm sure you do postcards for class action suits and settlements, and you're part of this class and you want the like I'm gonna get like forty two cents and the attorney's going to get forty two million, So it's not even worth my time. You know, That's exactly right.
But I just had fun with and every once in a while i'd come across that letter or that's just funny for three cents frame that?
Yeah, there you go. It's like the first dollar you make in a business. I framed the three cent check right there, no doubt about it. It's like, I know how that works with the class action had a gym membership from nineteen ninety two. I'm gonna get how much Wow, we're gonna sell us for millions of dollars. Okay, Gret, how much do I get? You get forty two cents? Yeah, okay, I'm good. One more of Les's two up Portsmouth and Ross on the Scottsland Show on seven hundred WW thanks
for checking in, man on Hold, I appreciate you. What's up.
I'm totally against giving money to billionaires for their playgrounds. Number one. Number two our legislators was well cordoraty probably thirty years to go to figure out school funding. Number two or number three is we also have a property tax issue. I would much rather see the school funding and the property tax get taken care of with this money.
Seeing how this is public funds and not our legislators funds and not rich people's funds, which should be used for the better of the people that work in this state and have funds coming to them instead of rich people and politicians. And if they want a new stadium in Cleveland, go to that city or that county and let the voters in that county decide the House and Family needs money from them and not from the whole state.
Well, the state's going to wind up kicking money in just the nature of it, because the revenue that comes in from NFL football and the prestigio I mean, you know, it's a measurable but the prestige of having two NFL teams in Ohio. They don't want to lose that for obvious reasons. And as far as the billionaires go, I mean, we can't speak of the deal that the Brown family got. It's much better than in the nineties, for sure, but
relative to the one in Cleveland. You know, the six hundred million dollars, the Hasms are essentially putting up a billion of their own money in this. That's it's not like we're just giving the money away. There are stipulations along with this.
Well, but it's not their money to give away, the politicians or anyone's money to give away. It's the people's friends. It's unclaimed. It stirs and if they're like our local newspaper here, which is a very poor newspaper that nobody buys it, and they put it in there, nobody sees it.
Well, I mean, it is on it is on social you know, I get what you're saying. But at the same time, is like, do you just hold on the money. There's there's money in that fund that's more than ten years old. I mean, at some point, what do you do with
the money? I think it's a legit, legit issue. It's called achievement in that there's a there's a cure period there until like ten years in Ohio that says, you know, if you don't claim the money after ten years and because reverts back to the how we want to spend it as the public fund. So you know, I think there's there's there's some there's some burden on the person who the money is owed to as well to claim it true.
But do you know what if I'm fifteen years behind or got a tax built from fifteen years ago, they can miraculously find me.
Well, there's no question there. And you, oh, you know, you know two bucks on of your taxes from six and a half years ago. They're going to find a way to come at you again. They can find you when they need to find you. In that, my friend, we both agree on there's no doubt about it. I got to go Ross, thanks for checking in this morning. I think it's the calls at five, one, three, seven, eight hundred, the big one talk back if you're listening
to or radio app. I mean it is something else they will if they need to find you, they will find you. This one maybe not so much. I'm not saying that I agree with the state one hundred percent of this. I lean towards doing this, uh, simply because I think the best thing would have done is to,
you know, attach a attax to gaming. I don't know why I didn't support that, and particularly you know when you talk about the big sports books out there, you know other day I wouldn't do the what forty percent that New York is doing fifty whatever, It something ridiculous, but you know, you could definitely do seventeen to twenty percent tax on them, and that will come out of the big It's not like you know, you're they're going
to charge you more. And I think you know when you examine that, I'm not for gouging businesses no matter what device is. But at the same time, you look at going, well, you know they're making still making a lot of money, and it's not like you can go and get it out of you know, past that those costs on to the consumer when it comes to gaming, everyone's got enough money in that seemed the way to go. But for some reason decide not to do that and do this route as well, which is a lot more
sticky in my opinion. But you know, you clean up the website thing, make it a little bit more user friendly. That's not hard. The other one is actually notifying people and going doing your due diligence, trying to locate so when you can. When it comes to taxes, I don't know why you wouldn't do it with the unclaimed funds. Anyway, I got to get a time out in just to happen the show. We'll switch it up a little bit here.
Scotty Johnson, Chair of Law and Public Safety. I couldn't agree with Scotty Moore on the issue of going wait a minute, hold on just a second. We had the George Floyd Blm protest back in twenty twenty summer twenty twenty, and we had countless people come in, not only from Ohio locally, but many many people from out of state. As you know, any tempt there's a big protest like this,
you're going to get interlopers coming in. Most of the people acted well in protests extra their First Amendment rights. We did have some issues, however, and when the city said Hey, listen, we've got a lot of people in the city right now. We're going to institute a curfew, and if you break curfew, we're going to arrest you. The problem with that, though, of course, is the fact that these people collectively got together, four hundred and seventy nine of them and sued the city and the county.
And I, you know, if we pass and say there's an ordinance here arresting criminals because there's a curfew, much like Joe Niles and I understand your right to peacefully assemble, but you also have, like anything, there are limits to those constitutional rights. Kind of a yelling fire in a crowded theater. I don't know how that doesn't apply here. And bigger question is why isn't Why didn't the city
just fight this thing. I'll get to Scotti on that coming up next on the show here on the Home of the Best Bengals coverage seven hundred WWT Cincinnati.
You do want to be American?
All right?
Here we go, second of the show stopped flowing on seven hundred w welw busy today, busy, busy, busy. The city and the county have settled in a lawsuit, so Back in twenty twenty, during the Black Lives Matter George Floyd protests here in Cincinnati went about four hundred and sixty nine protesters, exactly four hundred and sixty nine protesters,
I should say. During those protests they have alleged in their suits police brutality in humane conditions of the Hamlin County jail and as part of the settlement which has been finalized Hamlin County, the jailers pay sixty five thousand dollars. The city on the hook for eight million dollars. Scottie Johnson, council member, not happy about this at all, of course, Chairs Public Safety and Governance of the City of Cincinnati. Scotty, welcome back, my friend. How are you doing? Man?
Doing well, Scott A little busy, but yeah, all's welly.
Good to be with you.
Ian you as well. I appreciate you taking time out. You know, I read your comments and saw your comments. I couldn't agree with you more on this one. What's disturbing about this is well, on a number of levels, the city paying eight million of the eight point one million dollars, some of the county only paying sixty five thousand dollars, and I think also the fact that you mean, it seems like the city and you know better than I will, it seems like the first thing they want
to do is settle as opposed to actually fighting. So I couldn't imagine a jury looking at what happened in twenty twenty and going, yeah, you know what, these people are victims. I wouldn't see that happening in Hamlet County. Quite honestly, are you surprised we didn't fight this?
Well, according to our law department, there was a lot of negotiation that took place, and the biggest thing that came back was there was a possibility, if we were to lose this, you could be paying double of the eight million. You know what disturbs me more than anything else is the fact that I'm still waiting on the numbers of how many of these people were actually residents of Cincinnati.
And I think what.
Happens, Scott is we send a very dangerous precedent that Cincinnati is a place that you can come break the law and get paid for breaking the law. Now, let me say this, nobody can doone civil rights being violated. Nobody condones mistreatment of any form or any shape, form or fashion but let's just be let's get to the meat and potatoes here. The Cincinnati police were faced with extremely difficult circumstances. And when you have a number of I guarantee you some of these people that are going
to get paid are professional protests. They go from city to city and do what they believe is within their rights, and the police respond to that. We had property damage, we had police officers being assaulted, and that is something that is completely unacceptable in Cincinnati. So now you got people coming into Cincinnati to protest, that's your right to protest peacefully.
But after the police give you.
Instructions and lay down the law, you need to follow that law.
Now when you as it.
Was indicat during twenty twenty, nobody talked about police brutality. All the conversation was about how they were treated when they got to the jail in the Sally Point part area of the county jail. And now the city is getting ready to pay eight million dollars. Something doesn't smell right here at all.
Yeah.
The thing is because you had four hundred and seventy nine people a little start there, that's an extreme number of big size crowd for police officers to deal with. I look at that number, go, okay, that's pretty substantial there, and it would be reasonable based on the threats towards law enforcement, maybe based on property damage and the like, is to institute a curfew. And they're saying that that is somehow unconstitutional. You know, you're not saying you can't protest.
But we know that these We know that our consocial rights are not an absolute right. The old yelling and screaming fire in a crowded theater, for example, that's not a First Amendment violation. Our thing putting up reasonable curfew for adult protesters is would stand a constitutional test, wasn't you know? I mean, you're not saying you can protest, you just have to do it and you gotta go
up the street at dark. Because while we've seen what happened across the country with cities literally burning down, Scottie Johnson private property being destroyed by these protesters, that it was reasonable to an actor curfew.
What's wrong with that exactly?
And see that's we have a right and the mayor, and the mayor has a right to institute a protests until control is until the Cincinnati police get control back in the city. So I'm with you one hundred percent on that. Then if you look what happened after the after the four hundred and sixty nine people were arrested, Cincinnati, unlike other major cities, didn't have another day of knuckleheads running through our city.
So the issue here is.
As what's disturbing to me is nobody talked about police brutality. All complaints came from my recognition recognition recollection. And I'm not saying I know everything, but all complaints were about how they were treated when they got to the jail. And I'm saying that if that's the case, then therefore, why is the county writing a measly little check for sixty five thousand in the city's writing a check.
For eight million.
All complaints during that time were about how they were treated at the jail and the Sallyport area. I took hundreds of prisoners in there over a career. It belongs to the county. It appears based on video, that's where they were left in the Sallyport area.
And if there were.
Cases of brutality by this Sinnati police that's just now coming to light.
Interesting. Yeah, let's focus on that, Scotty real quick. Here is because the lawsuit alleges that polices to be CPD used tear gas, pepper spray, flash bangs and crowds or maybe just flash grenades on crowds including disabled people and children that are caught up in there, that they were detained on hours on buses outside in the weather, and that would have been in the summer, with no access to toilet, water, food, blankets, shelter, or necessary medication. In
the sally Port Hamilt County. It's an open air sally port there. But again, if you had four hundred and seventy nine people to process, that's going to take some time. You're going to be sitting out there. Relative to the tear gas, pepper spray and flash grenades, did Cincinnati to your knowledge, CPD officers ever deploy that.
I think there might have been some pepper spray to get peak some crowds under control. I'm not sure Scott one hundred percent whether flash bangs were used, but if they were used, I get Cincinnati police are the best trained in this nation. If they were used, it was necessary, I know for a fact based on the commanders that were running that during that time. Tactically sound gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen. So if it was necessary to use flash banks,
then that those were deployed. But we gotta make sure that Cincinnati is not a place you got to write to protests. I support protests if it's orderly and there's no property damage, but you don't get to come to Cincinnati act lawless and then you get a check for that. That's a problem, and we gotta make sure that message is clear. You can come to Cincinnati and protests, but you're gonna do it peacefully, and you're gonna do it under the laws that the city of Cincinnati have in place.
For those people who maybe weren't around then, weren't born there, or were less paying attention, or simply forgot. Because this goes back to twenty twenty five years later, each year in my life's got in about you feels like it's about I can barely remember what I did yesterday alone, five years ago. Nonetheless, the reality of life is that something's happened during those protesters. I recall, can you enlighten us as to some of the things that members that
are not all I think they're largely well behaved. But of course, as you said, there's gonna be some knuckleheads in a group like that trying to take their liberties with the law. What did you see or what did you hear at the time that would have constituted a reason to enforce this curfew that the city says, Well.
You had, first of all, you had people unfortunate of people in traffic where there's here's the thanks Scott, and I'll get to that. Number one is Cincinnati police are responsible for making sure everybody safe. That's the residents not involved in protests. Those are business owners. Those are the protesters. So some were in traffic causing possibly being a hazard to getting hit by cars. The Cincinnati police were responsible for fake making. I'm sure nobody got hit by cars.
You don't get to shut down traffic in Cincinnati where a possibility you get ran over by car. Then people are pointing at the police. Were where were the police? So we had people in traffic, we had people breaking windows, we had people throwing things at the police. You had people attempting to assault police. So those are things that would justify we're going to bring order back to Cincinnati
and implement a curfew. How in the world a curfew is unconstitutional when you have people committing crimes is beyond my belief. So those factors led to the fact that it's time for people to get off the streets so order to be restored in.
Cincinnati, Scottie Johnson, would this settlement and a grain You know with settlements there's no fault, there is given. But based on the precedent set saying that, okay, curf you can't have a curfew anymore for adults. Would does that then undermine the juvenile curfew the Cincinnati has.
No we're gonna push that. No, I pray not, because let's just be frank. Young people obviously have shown in the past they don't know how to conduct themselves. Some not all don't know how to conduct themselves, and they need to be home at a specific hour. There's nothing positive for people under eighteen after midnight, Absolutely nothing positive. You need to be at home somewhere. So let's hope that's not Let's hope. And I think we need to
stick to making sure our young people are safe. It's a safety issue for them also, and so we're not going to We're not going to back off. We don't need to change all policies and procedures every time somebody sues or every time somebody gets paid in a settlement. We've got a fantastic city here. We're gonna make sure that we keep it safe, and we're gonna make sure the Cincinnati Police are supported in making sure all citizens are safe. I think Scott has a re all of this, though.
We've seen better communication between the city and the county, the city police and the Sheriff's department at the jail, and I think everybody was overwhelmed when you arrest four hundred and sixty nine people. But I still go back to we didn't hear complaints during the twenty twenty that they were people were being brutalized by the Cincinnati police. The complaints came as a result of how long they had to sit in the sally Port.
Look, if you break the law, don't.
Look for us to put a pamper on you or provide you with air conditioned and feed you and.
All of those different things.
You know, that's just stuff that people that professional protesters need to know that, and you need to understand that the Cincinnati.
Police are here to enforce the law.
They're not here to provide you with pampers and water and all of that.
Different type of stuff. When you break the law.
You know, I don't want to see anybody abuse or brutalized or rights violated. But when you break the law, then you need to be in for what comes with that.
Yeah, we're not Baltimore, but I subscribe to the theory. You know, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. If you've got a six ro you know, sitting around for six or seven hours in the heat of the sally Port while you're waiting to be processed, that's that's something you should have considered prior to your activity, or prior to being someone who's going to knowingly break the law. He
is a council member. Scotti Johnson on the Scott's lun Show seven hundred WW Chair of Public Safety and Government. City settling with these four hundred and sixty nine protesters for the tune of eight million dollars roughly, but the county Hamlet County is only on the hook for sixty five thousand dollars. The lawsuit describes, as I mentioned, the protest as being held for hours on buses which are air conditioned by the way, and then outside without access to toilet or water or medication.
I don't know.
I remember seeing news coverage of you guys handing out bottles of water to people. Is that an acceptable level of detention your eyes of someone? The law enforcement and should the law should? Should the courts look at this and go, hey, look, these are extenuating circumstances. We were overwhelmed with lawbreakers and they knowingly violated the curfew that was in place to protect businesses and the quality of life in Cincinnati. You can protest, but we can limit
where and what that protest looks like. That seemed to be from what I remember, it was reasonable at the time. How did this become so unreasonable? And why is the county only paying sixty five grand?
That's that's Those are great questions, and you said it.
You know we're not No.
If Cincinnati leads the leads the nation in reform, we lead the nation, and we respecting people's civil rights, We lead the nation when it comes to being community oriented. So we know our track record is clean when it comes to how we treat people, in how we interact with citizens.
If Cincinnati, he's God.
I'm still waiting to see what numbers, how many of these people actually live in Cincinnati, and how many of them from out of town. So those are things we got to take under consideration. Also, as you said, we were overwhelmed, the county was, the jail was overwhelmed. So I think better communication has been established as a result of what happened here, But we got to make sure people understand that you need to follow the law in Cincinnati when you come.
Here to protest.
I'm still that discrepancy, that's huge discrepancy between sixty.
Five thousand and eight million.
That's still a huge question to get that. I'm still I'm still puzzled by Yeah, because.
What I described outside of the maybe the flash bangs being used in tear gas, but that's reasonable considering the way some of the crowd or acting control of the crowd. But if the major crux of this was being held on buses for hours and sitting out in the sally port and no access to medication, that would be after Hamlin County takes custody of that subject. Correct, So that's
outside of your control. And yet the city's eight million dollars in their sixty five grand I just I don't understand how they came to these numbers.
And see here's the thing here, here's the question. Is the Sallyport into Sallyport. If you're into Sallyport, are you still under the control of Cincinnati Police and all the other agencies in Hamilton County or do you you now become under control of the county deputies once you enter the just the jail.
See, I know.
Time and time again in the sally Port there were times where you had disarly prisoners that the jets, that the deputies would come and assist you and take immediate control of disarly prisoners in the Sallyport area before you could even get some of these.
Clowns out of the car.
So that's where somebody that has been there and done it. That's where I'm saying, hold on, wait a minute now, control is after the part prisoner's process. No, the sally Port belonged. That's part of the jail. It once you enter the jail. Unless something has changed in the coming up on six years, hop and cone and that something has changed, and.
Now the videos Cincinnati runs.
The sally portst That's why I got a real problem with what happened here.
Yeah, uh okay, So the sally part of your hearings. It kind of looks like in some areas looks like a garage you've ever seen a cop show. It's or the unit'll roll in, there's a gate or a door. You come in, it's secure. The sub subject has taken and cuffs, usually to a a window where you're literally
you're transferring control from Cincinnati to the county. At some point you're actually signing or you're signing this away, and it's like a legal it's a legal exchange saying, okay, you now have legal custody of this individual or individuals the case may be. H The sally Port in Hamlet County is not you know, it's it's not an air conditioned area. It's and it's kind of like a courtyard
sort of speak. But it's pretty clear that you're trying you and and all the arrests you've enacted in your professional Chris Scottie Johnson, you literally signed custody over to the county. When when when they're sitting there in there on county land being monitored by deputies and jailers, that's out of your control. And yet uh, the city is the one having to foot the bill for this. It's just it's really really interesting why we came to the sellment.
You think at some point we ain't know why they came to this conclusion.
I think, yeah, I think those questions are definitely being asked by my colleagues. I've got the same question. But I think the preliminary response from law has been that, uh, we we could have gone down a rabbit hole where we're paying almost double the eight million. I don't understand that part. Not an attorney, I don't know everything. So you know, the experts get to lead on this. But as you as you explained properly as a Cincinnati police officer,
to even get in the sally Port, their security. So once your car passes through one gate, stuck between two gates before you even get into the big area. So that to me would say, that's county control. So once those metro buses with four hundred plus people got in the sally Port, you're now on county property and the deputy sheriffs have control. Unless something has changed over the six years.
I don't think it has. I think there's that legal custody, there's that transfer issue. Scottie Johnson, I'll leave it at that, man, I appreciate you coming on this morning. Thanks for enlightening us or maybe just frustrating us even more. I have no idea, ope not take care of me. I appreciate you. Yeah, so that's what eleven twelve grand per person. Awesome SALOONI here seven hundred ww giving you a vocational leg up
on everyone else. Here's our career, Sir, Julie Bouki. You probably heard the term winners never quit, quitters never win. On the other hand, we do have people who are quiet quitting, so you make sense of that. Sometimes quitty is good. Sometimes quitting is good. Pinch hitting for Julie Bouc today is our friend Andy Duke. Andy is a professional decision scientist and former professional poker player to talk about when it's okay to quit, Annie, welcome back. How are you?
I'm good? Are you?
Why'd you retire from poker? Did they have enough of you winning? What's going on there? Did you run some problems? Did you have to start throwing fists at people? What's going on Annie?
With you?
No?
You know what. I've been doing it preteen years and I just didn't I didn't enjoy it anymore. And that's a really good reason to.
Quit something reason the question we do.
Yeah, we're supposed to be making our sound happy, right, and if you figure out that you're not happy doing something, you should go do something else.
Yeah, I couldn't do it. You know, I've got a vegas. I's got a Vegas and you go and you go to bed at some ungodly hour like it, I don't four o'clock in the morning, and you roll down back at one in the afternoon. The same people are sitting at the poker table. My ADHD will not allow me to do that.
Well, you know what, Actually, I think some people with ADHD great hyper focused. So actually, poker it's full of people with ADHD. I think it's just yet I want.
To chew my leg off after about an hour, I'm good. Well, let's start with this. Uh, the idea that quitters never win, Winners never quit. That's what we tell our kids. That where we were told. But and I think certainly it's a virtue, right, You've got to be persistent. You can't quit easily. You have to keep trying and trying and trying. But that makes it sound like quitting is a vice, is it.
Yeah, No, it's not, as I say, the opposite of a great virtue is awful a great virtue.
So I agree with you.
The grit is a virtue. In order to succeed at something, you will have had stuff to stick to it. But that doesn't mean that stick to things and you'll succeed because what if, like, for example, you get a concussion on the football field, since you walk off the field. What if you are in a job with a toxic box, since you go try to find another one. Or you know,
a relationship that's making you deeply unhappy. You know, assuming that you've tried to make it work and all times point to it's not going to change, shouldn't you walk away? So in fact, winners quit a lot because what they do is they try a whole lot of stuff and they quit all the things that aren't working so that they can stick to the things that are.
It's kind of like this in the stock market. Now you think Wall Street, right, ultra competitive and cutthroat and that whole bra culture thing going on, and you would think that, yeah, I know, quitting is a weakness, but those guys quit all the time. You know, you pump up a stock and say, okay, this is working. Out we're going to cut and run. They do that consistently. That's how they make that's how they're successful.
Well that's exactly right. I mean, that's the thing is that in order to be successful, you have to quit the things that aren't working. And a lot of times what happens with people who are trading stops is that once they own something that's losing, they find it really
really hard to get rid of it. This is true of not necessarily elite traders, but you're average person who's playing in the stock market, and you know the reason is that, like, if you buy a stock at fifty and it's trading at forty, don't you want to get that ten dollars back? That's that feeling that we have, like, well if I sell now, then like I can't get that ten dollars back. But that's something called the sunk
cost fallacy. What you've already lost in it doesn't matter very much is the question of would you buy it today?
Right?
And if the answer is no, I would prefer to buy something else. You want to go do that. But we get stuck in these things because of our refusal to quit.
That makes sense, it's human nature, right, you can't just walk away because then you can't validate all the time and effort you spent getting to where you were.
Well, that's exactly right. So the sunk cost fallacy doesn't just have to do with money, right, So you could be losing money in a stock and not want to walk away. But people say all the time when you know, you're talking to a friend and they're in a unhappy relationship and you say, well, why don't you walk away? And they said, because I've put so much time into it. You know, I've put a year into this relationship. I can't walk away now, or you know, in terms of effort,
you say, weren't you walking away from this job? Because they'll say, because then all of my onboarding and all of the training and getting to know the culture of the workplace that will be you know, for not, I'll have wasted it. But waste isn't really a backward looking problem because that stuff has already gone. What matters is do you want to go into work the next day? Is this the right place for you to be going forward?
And we have trouble thinking about waste as a forward looking problem, like in order to try to not waste something that I've already put into it. I'm going to waste more stuff is basically what ends up happening with the sun crost fallacy.
Yeah, and that makes a lot of sense. I think that's also pretty obvious. But you can hold on to something for so long you wind up harming yourself in the end. I think there's a great analogy here with a company a lot of people knowing that as Seers, right, how literally they were Amazon before Amazon, now not in the technological sense, but in the consumer and purchasing and warehousing sense. Absolutely. They just I think that's a fascinating story.
Yeah. So Sears was so huge that in the nineteen fifties they represent one percent of gross national products. This was a really big company. So yeah, so they had, you know, they had all these retail stores. Everybody went to Sears for all of their stus. But I think it's pretty well known that they went bankrupt really in the nineties. They started to really financially falter, and then by the two thousands they were bankrupt, out of business. They try and merging with Kmart at some point, which
I think people called the double suicide. The critics called it because Kmart was also faltering at that point. The thing that people don't know about Sears that I think is really interesting is that Sears was also a financial services company. So in particular in the nineteen thirties, when people started driving cars to their retail locations, they thought, oh, you know, people might need insurance to these cards, so
they founded a company called All State Insurance. I assume you've heard of it.
Yeah, I didn't know that we started that. That's interesting, right, And.
They owned it actually all the way through the early nineties, and All Say Insurance the last time I checked this market cap was with somewhere around forty billion dollars or something like that. And then they also owned a company called Being Winter, which was a really big stopware for it. I think Morgan Stanley acquired it. It was forty percent of Morgan Stanley's where if they owned Discover Card, they created the Discover card, and they had cold wal Banker.
So then you have to ask for people, how did they go broke if they owned all of this stuff, And it's actually a failure to quit that caused them to go broke when they started faltering in the nineties, when all of a sudden they weren't a number one retailer anymore that went to k martin Walmart at that time, and then Target pushed them out of the way. Also, when those retail locations started faltering, the shareholders were saying, you've got to do something because these retail stores are
losing money. So and you know, this other stuff is making money and it's to drag on the business. And what the board decided to do was quote unquote get back to its retailing routs. So they refused to quit the retail business. And they still off all of these amazing financial services business in order to try to save the retail business. Why wouldn't they quit that when it was obvious that you should have held on to all states I mean obviously right right, right right, because what
my fears they were a retail company. It was their identity. And this is a lesson for all of us that the hardest thing to quit is who you are. So the things that you define you expet to find you, whether it's your job or your beliefs or whatever it is, those are going to be the things that's hurdest for you to walk away from.
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense, And you know, the Seers thing was. It's the killer is if you go back in one hundred years before the retail shops, most of America's are grarian, rural and people would buy their stuff with the Seers catalog that would show up right, and so they'd ship all the stuff to them. It was Amazon without the Internet, basically, is what it was.
They missed out on that whole thing. And yeah, we're gonna stick with brick and mortar retail because you know, they're around the you know, the birth of the internet age and online shopping. They could have been all over that, but they chose not to. And now Sears is a is a tombstone and and all because probably they're sitting around some wood paneled boardroom looking at pictures of the founder of Sears and going, man, we can't disappoint the
old man. There's a lot of analogies there, you know, and that that legacy kind of thing, and you know, well, what what the we're a retail company. Now you're your company that has responsibilities to shareholders and workers. That's basically the relationship there. You sell what people want to buy, and they didn't do that, and there's your lesson there. Now, On the other hand, regarding what we're talking about this morning on seven hundred WLW and Anny Duke is on
she's a decision scientist. And the analogy that winners never quit, well, yeah, they quit all the time because they're smart. That's that's why they're winners. What what about that advice about quitting while you're ahead? Is that the extreme opposite of this.
So it's really funny, you know, Scott like. So there's all this advice about quitting, most of which says, you know, never ever give up, or quitters never win. Winners never quit if first you don't try, try yet there's one that encourages you to quit it, which is quit while you're a head. And the funny thing about it, it's actually terrible advice, just like the other stuff is terrible advice.
So it's clear you should shouldn't just stick to things comewhat made because context matters, right, like if you get injured in a fourse game, walk away. But quit while you're a head is really interesting because what you find with human behavior is that the time that we do tend to quit too early, at least as adults, right, kids quit too early because they can't see the reward at the end of the rainboat, right, But that's not true for adults, right. So for adults, the time that
we do quit too early is when we're ahead. So if you let's say that, like in the stock market, they have something called taking and what that means basically is like, if you buy a stock at fifty, you'll decide in advance that if it gets to fifty eight you'll sell it. Right, so you'll make that decision. Ms you'll also put in an order which says, if it gets to fifty eight, I'm going to sell the stock,
and it will automatically sell. What you find is that, let's say to fifty five, people will sell then instead of waiting till it gets to fifty eight. So once they're ahead of where they started, then they'll go ahead and quit and this happens. It's really interesting because what does being ahead mean? I means essentially having reached some
sort of goal in your head. And so there was a really interesting study that was done with New York City cab drivers from the nineteen eighties before the days of uber, and what they found was that when they looked at their trip feet, they were driving really long hours when there weren't any fares around, and driving really short hours when there were lots of fares around. So
that's weird because that's backwards. You would think they want to drive a lot when there's lots of stars, and they'd want to drive very little when they are very few fairsreat this, by the way, this pattern was costing them. They would have made fifteen percent more if they did what I just said, drive more when there were lots of fares and drive little when they're very few. So they were costing themselves a lot of money with this behavior.
So the researcher said, well, what's going on? Why are they stopping so and when there's lots of fares around? And they asked the drivers, and the drivers that turned out had set like a target and earning his goal for the day, Like what, they didn't want to make three hundred dollars for the day. As soon as they
hit the three hundred dollars they quit. Otherwise they would just keep going so right, So this is where you get like this quit while your head is really bad advice because what that meant was it's just them a really long time to hit their goal when there were no fares around, so they drove for a really long time. But when there were last affairs around, they quit their They quit really quickly because they got to their goal
really fast. So then they considered themselves a head at that point, and so they quit as soon as they were ahead. Well, that created really bad behavior because they that's when they should have been gritty. Right, that's why I should have driving. So this is why this is just bad advice. Quit while your head. Actually really exaggerate the bias that we already have.
Yeah, and it seems like everyone's this way, right are we Are we pre wired as humans to stick with the status quo?
Yeah, I mean, look, there are some you know, there are some people who who are going to be better quitters than others. But in general, when you look across human behavior, we love the status quo. And part of the reason that we love the status quo is this weird thing where when the status quo is going really poorly, we actually tolerate it much better than the fear of maybe if I switch and start something new it won't
turn out well. So you'll hear this all the time, like you'll be talking to a friend who's been a job that they hate, and you'll say, well, why aren't you switching, like, go do something else? And we'll say, but what if I take a new job and I hate that? And it's such a strange thing to say, because it's like, but you hate the job you're already in, Like you know that for a fact. Yeah, there's some chance you might not like the new thing, but there's
also a chance that you might really like it. But the status quo is a really comfortable place to be, and we don't even when we stick with the status quo, we do really think about it as an active decision. Like that same friend when you see them three weeks later and you say, have you quit yet, They'll say, I'm not ready to make a decision yet, and it's like, no, but you did make a decision for the last three reaps. You decided to stay in the job that you're in.
So there's all these things that are causing us to stick to the thing we already know and be afraid of switching to new things. Even if those new things would you don't have a much better chance of being better.
For it makes sense, Annie Duke, She's a decision scientist, and it's quit. The power of knowing when to walk away and quitting is not losing as long as you're doing it with the right intent and it's thoughtful. Annie, thanks again. I appreciate the time.
Thank you, Annie Duke.
She was in for Julie this morning, taking the day off. Alonder the weather. Hope she's feeling better. To be back next week for sure.
Though.
We've got a news update happening. We've got weather moving in, we got snow coming that we got well not yet, we got wind, we got rain, then snow. It's going to get worse before it gets better, for sure. Full news update coming up in just minutes and when a return of the show. He's Ohio Senator Steve Hoffman, the author of Senate Bill fifty six. This is the Ohio recreational law he helped craft, and it's been changed billions of times since it came to fruition. Some disturbing elements
that all bad. I'm not going to think this is the worst thing. Ever, there's some concerns with what was negotiated. Try and get this thing signed by the governor. The biggest impact, of course, is the fact that this is going to make thch beverages legal again to be sold in bars, and that whole industry is just massive. It's going to eclipse the craft beer industry before too long because craft beer is kind of a dying thing, and how thhch and fuse beverages are coming along because I'm
play for a lot of people. You feel better after you drink them. It's different kind of buzz. Nonetheless, that is going to be part of this thing. At least the Fed's come to their senses hopefully and allow that to be sold. They're going to get all the hemp based products that and those derivatives, the intoxicating derivatives that are sold by some convenience stores to miners. That's getting
cleaned up so you can get that dispensers. But I mentioned there's some troubling elements here too, and that is the big nanny state in effect here. Look, I'm pro marijuana. I've been pro marijuana before this law took a when it was extreme, when no states allowed you to use marijuana. I'm glad to see people come into their census finally, and I understand there's got to be some regulation, but
some of this stuff just screams nanny state. From the people out of one side of their mouth who scream about how the government has to get out of your life. They have no problem getting in your life when it suits their interest. We'll get to that next with State Senator Steve Hoffman from Tip City coming up on the show right after this on the Home of the Best Bengals coverage seven hundred WLW.
I do want to be an American idiot?
Hi, Scott Calm back on seven hundred WLW and what feels like the I don't know one hundred and sixty seven thousandth provision to the Ohio Recreational Marijuana lows headed to the Governor's desk for his signature, and that will become law this time. All intoxicating him products can only be sold in dispensaries. It would be illegal to bring marijuana back to Ohio from another state. And there's a number of other changes, well, some minor other ones. Leaves
the scratch in your head and on. That is the architect of what started the Senate Bill fifty six. At State Senator Steve Hoffman out of Justice, Tip City, Steve, how.
Are you doing well on yourself?
I'm doing fine. One hundred and sixty seven thousandth revision, I believe, and that's part of compromise and deals being made. But man, this thing is it really has been carved up and put back together several times for sure?
Well it has. It is both.
You know.
Initially the Senate had two bills that I had on one on marijuana, and then Senable Lady sixth on hamp the House put them together and mixed it all up, and this is.
What we got.
Okay, could take an effect by I think in March, if signed soon here by the governor. So let's just jump in and I guess to me, as a civil libertarian, what concerns me is there's a chance this is the accusations of the what the seven Democrats that devoted against us.
But bring up some points about this could eliminate protections from you know, maybe losing your job if you're using and even on your own time for that matter, necessarily on the job, but could get you kicked out of your rental unit if you rent an apartment or something house. Could also negate your parting rights in Ohio. Those are pretty extreme arguments against this, and how do they how do they fit in here?
I think most of those things are already in statute and are just a continuation of those so your parenting rights. Sure, the judge should should be able to decide on his opinion if you have a if you smoke every Friday night and your kids are not around.
I don't think he's going to care.
But he should have the ability to say, hey, look, you're smoking every day when your child is at the home and he's two years old. He should be able to have that that discretion, And that's what we leave it. And same as the as for the employer. For the employer in medical from the beginning, if if it's a drug pre workplace, it's a drug pre workplace, he has the right to terminate you, not because you smoke, but you're you're positive at the workplace.
Yeah, I guess the one that bothers me most is a landlord myself. Is I get smoking because you say, hey, no smoking in units, but if someone vapes in one of your rentals, you could kick them out as well. I'm not quite sure I agree with that.
Yeah, I mean, I wanted to give the discretion to the landlord because if you know somebody is in there and they're smoking, and it really stinks and you go in, you know, in a year later the guy moves out and Scott clones rental. You have to go clean it up and you just can't get that smell out and cost you thousands of dollars. It's after the discretion the guy that owns the buil.
That's reasonable, but the vaping thing doesn't leave smell, So okay, we'll leave that one out. That's a that's an outlaiyer there. This would have been intoxic eating hemp products from being all outside of licensed marijuana dispensaries, and it closes that quote unquote loophole were you know, kids underage kids were buying stuff at convenience stores and Delta eight and getting high.
Yeah, I mean that was the main thing that on the on the hemp side is to get you know, the things that looked like gummy bears and and things like that away from kids over twenty one. So that in the dispensary, we really just married neared the federal law that they you know they did in the center bill won the big beautiful bill, and we just spent that up. The feds gave it a year. We said those ninety days, you know after the governor signed it
to these things will go away. But we did carve out the beverages because I was thinking we got to carve out the beverages because Scott Flown and his wife like to drink beverages.
Well, I think that's the biggest win so far. However, I will say that that only carries the THC. Beverages can be sold until the end of the year twenty twenty six, which is problematic, but that has to do with federal luck.
Right.
Yeah, again, it's mirrors federal law. We also put in the bill, and that's none of the non codified section is that the House and Senate if the FED has changed that and allow for the beverages, we will come back and make a good faith effort to carve out regulations. We didn't have time to put in a tax structure, regulatory things, inspection and stuff like that. So we'll make a good if the Feds change it, will come back and make a good faith effort.
Yeah, and I would think that the FEDS would because it is a huge industry. I mean, you know, not only were we making these seven hundred million dollars in the first year recremational marijuana but one of the biggest growing sectors if you talk to beverage producers, is the people are kind of done with craft beer and now they're moving towards the THC ones because you feel a lot better the next day we drink, you know, maybe three or four beers and you feel a little bloated
and tired. You don't get that, I guess with the THC beverages, and people are buying those by now, by the bucketfull. Let's put it that way. We don't want to really, I mean, we want to be pro business here, right, You're right.
I mean, look, Ryan Heist there in Cincinnati has a huge damp beverage business, and we're going to keep that and they're going to be able to do that going forward, and and uh, and they'll be able to sell it out of state.
You know, we we have it.
We're at five milligrams here, uh in the state of Ohio and and uh, you know other states are higher, and they'll be able to produce that and send it out of state.
If they want.
I'm trying to figure out though, the criminalizing someone bringing product back from let's say Michigan for example, here too. I don't know how you enforce that. I don't think that's enforceable. It's in a package already. How would someone know that it's purchased in Michigan and not somewhere or not in Ohio. And also the testing standards, it's some somehow Michigan's testing standards aren't up to snuff. I don't know. Can Michigans tolerate THHC better than Ohio wins. It's not
like they don't regulate it to some degree. What why is that in there?
I believe that there are a different standard. It is federal law, now, it's state law. Now, you can't bring it across the state line. I don't think there's gonna be the high The Democrats said yesterday that they're going to be lined up in Toledo to come across when you bring it across the state line, that's not going to happen. I think there's a different testing. Uh, you can figure it out, because Ohio has has seeds to sail tracking on on all marijuana products. But I don't
think it's going to be really enforced. And why why would we put it in there?
Well?
I think because uh, if it's abused, they'll be able to enforce it in the sense that if you're bringing you know, track too much, you cultivate too much, they'll be able to figure it out.
And that is that.
I hate the notion that it's another sneak and peak kind of thing, quite honestly, because hey, we saw you come out of a weed store in Michigan, or hey we you fit the profile. I just it's another reason for law enforce from the sneak and peak. I totally disagree with that. Okay, what about the THHD cap productions? So we'd set a new cap at seventy percent for extras, thirty five percent for flour, what does that mean to
the average consumer and what's the rationale behind that? What's the research saying.
I don't think the consumer is really going to notice anything. And the thirty five percent is basically that's what what you what they can grow now on on plants about thirty five percent PhD. That is not going to change the seventy per It's just you do you add more to get the level of PHC do you want in a product? It's like, yeah, you know, one hundred proof from one hundred and fifty proof from you take a
little more one a little less the other. So you're gonna get to concentrate concentration that you want.
Yeah, and then people will just take more with n't. I mean it really serves no purpose. You just gotta buy more product. I guess if you want to, if you want to, you know, a higher buzz, you're gonna just use more of it.
Yeah. I mean it's you, You're gonna people are gonna.
Get what they want.
Yeah.
I just I again, those two of that makes sense to me. Uh, you know, back to the well, the transportation is one thing, but the bill requires marijuana state in the original packaging and mandates trunk storage while driving. Again, I think that's another way for stops and searches. But I don't know. I go, Okay, well, original packaging, trunk storage at the case. The contention though, is it's somehow marijuana is more dangerous than a gun.
Uh.
There are less restrictions with carrying a gun at all, Hio, there is marijuana. Does that make sense?
Uh?
Probably not on the whole. I think what we really we're looking at or it's not sitting there next to you, it's not readily available. Keep it in the package so that you know this stuff on a gummy, a marijuana gummy or a just a regular gummy. You can't tell the difference, and you don't want to put in in. Some kids said, oh, there's a there. Those are my gummies, not a dad's gummies, and mix things up. So if you keep them, uh, keep them in the in the
original packages. And I know that you can't if you're homegrow you don't have an original package, but you know, keep that away from uh, you know, the.
Kids and people.
Okay, my original pe. So if I'm going over to Buddy's house and bring a couple of gummies with me, let's say, uh, I get pulled over in the officer set it, I could get a ticket for that. I mean, I'm not I'm just trying to think it should be the same as alcohol. Now you can't have open container and like if you leave at a restaurant and you didn't finish your wine, they will put the cork back and then seal it in a plastic bag to show
law enforce. And hey, it's not an open container so to speak, and then that should also apply to marijuana as well. But the trunk storage to me seems rather extreme.
I don't disagree with you. Maybe that's farther than we should have went, but you know, trying to trying to make things, you know, close to alcohol.
Yeah, he is a state senator, Steve Hoffman, and he's a physician, also author of Senate Bill fifty six, which has been chopped up a lot, and now it's going to the governor's desk to be signed. So if you're just joining some of the things that have changed, is and this is the good news here, There's there's a lot of good news in here too. It would make legal the THD beverages we've talked about till at least the end of twenty twenty six, so that's a two
year grace period. And in addition to that, we're talking about the transportation concerns. You can't bring weed back from another state. You can get stopped for that. Also, you have to have it in the trunk, it has to be in the original container. There's a lot of other elements of this thing. We're also capping the amount of THHC in the product as well, public storage ban, interstate transfer. But I mentioned that as well. I look at this whole thing and go, okay, well, if this is what
we had to do to get it all done. And it seems like in context. While there's some things that I question the sanity of, others like the THC beverage and the restricting of hemp sales to license suspenser as opposed to carryouts where kids can get it, are generally good things here.
No, I agree. And the other thing we haven't talked about is attacked so we can roll the ten percent tax on marijuana products and the thirty six percent of locals and as soon and because that's an appropriation. There's some good and the bad things with this bill. One it gives the governor line item veto ability, and the other thing it does is that as soon as he finds it, that money that's been sitting in the state's bank, about a one hundred million dollars will be distributed. Not instantly,
but you know, give them a couple of weeks. It will be good Christmas for these jurisdictions that have been waiting for a year and a half to get that money.
Yeah, they're like seven hundred million in sales this first year and you're going to get thirty six percent of that revenue. That's significant money right there. And what are the strings attached to that to local gums, how they can spend it.
They can spend it however they want. It's a ten percent pack that they're going to get. Thirty six of that ten percent, the state's going to get the other percent.
Gotcha, gotcha. So they can spend on whatever they want. And that's good because there's not municipalities that simply don't have the funding that's going to help make them hole.
Well, they accepted the dispensaries on the premise that they were going to say, be some negative. I don't think there's negative, but they accepted it so that knowing that they.
Would get money to do stuff with.
So we're honoring that that commitment that they accepted.
Yeah.
Yeah, the ten percent tax rate on records for marijuanas is maintained. Home grow by the way, because that was a source of contention. Six plants per adult, twelve per residents, which is unchanged, and a cap a four hundred dispensary state wide. All of that does stay the same. And then of course that moment, as soon as the governor signs us in the law, the money for that will become available. And there are some concerns in here. For sure. I don't think the sky's falling at all with the
Steve Hoffman. You've got to make concessions. I suppose there are some troubling things for me as a civil libertarian that leaves me scratching my head. But all in all, at least we keep that THC beverage business going until the end of twenty twenty six, and hopefully the federal government will come to their senses and say we should exempt that because there's just so much revenue involved, not just in Ohio but every state jumping on the THC
beverage bandwagon. As long as it's sold in a are regulated like alcohol, that's how this whole problem should be addressed in the first place.
I agree.
I think we I mean, I've said it. It's very unpopular in Columbus. I think we should deregulate the entire marijuana in the next five to ten years. We should still have those provisions to make it safe. But if Scott Sloan wants to grow five thousand square feet, he should be able to grow it if he can meet the license and all the requirements that everybody else does. We shouldn't just limit it to twelve or fifteen people, because that's not capitalism, that's not the free market.
Steve Hoffman got to get going, Senator, always appreciate the time.
You have a great day, you too, take care. Scott got a.
Roll and get news in happening right now here with traffic and weather, and the weather's concerned because we've got some snow moving in full details just seconds away. And the when return on the Scott's Loan show, Sarah's here a little snort action. We'll talk about the Bengals next seven hundred w Weld come in hot this morning, Sarah Lee with the Snort report this morning here everything sports, all the snorts, more sports, and.
We just have to laugh to keep from crying.
You are just unbearably happy this morning.
Again. I'm just laughing and smiling.
What do you have to be happy about? How dare you come in this studio after I've been slaving away for two and a half hours with that? What is wrong with you?
God forbid? Somebody is joyous around here. All you cranky older gentlemen.
Suck the life out of you.
So we did find out that the middle.
Aged women aren't much better.
I'm not there yet give me a couple more years.
Fifty What are you talking about?
Fifteen something? Fifteen years?
Anyways, you've been thirty five for seven years.
I've been thirty five for like to one year negative two years. Anyways, that's beside the point. We found out that the Reds. The Reds have money. The Reds have more money than we thought.
Just let's break it down here, Kyle Schwarber argument here.
And look, this is the last day I'm talking about Kyle Schwarberg for the.
Next five years.
All right, when he comes here as a Red in when he's thirty eight years old and he can't swing the bat anymore.
Right, then we'll get them.
The Reds are like, well, we'll give you a million bucks.
You can sit on the bench right right, hometown discount.
Yeah.
It turns out that Kyle Schwarber does love Cincinnati, but not as much as he loves playing for the Phillies.
I don't know if it's that it's twenty five million.
Five million is more than twenty He's.
Like, you know what, twenty five million dollars is a lot better than living in Cincinnati.
So there you go.
And the Pirates offered a better Dean not only four years.
But I think the Pirate Soffer was four years at one twenty and the Reds were five at one twenty five, and the Philly said, hold our beer five for one fifty.
Yeah, we'll pay the luxury tax because you know it's big market. Now I got the money, we don't.
Yeah, so he will be thirty three when he starts the season, thirty eight when the contract is up, so it ain't over.
We could still see this guy in a Reds You.
I don't think so.
But who knew that the red had this one hundred and twenty five million dollars that they were just ready to bother you to go?
And then people will why do you make it one thirty five?
Why not?
Well, I guess when it's not your money, you can spend it, right.
Yeah, like I will gladly spend the RDS money, I will gladly spend somebody else's money. But according to Ken Rosenthal, this is what he said. The Reds are not expected to pursue other expensive free agents this off season.
Their pursuit of Kyle Schwarber was due to the belief that he would drive ticket sales.
Well, winning generally does drive tickets.
Winning does a lot of good does.
Whether it's Kyle Schwarber or not. Now I will contend again. You know, we've seen this movie play out before where you bring somewhere like Griffy and how did that work out? Now, granted he was older, is more beat up, but my point is it seems like when you get people who are even moderately good, decent hitters and they come here, they can't hit.
And it doesn't matter where they're from.
Look, I'm just looking at the fact that he hit fifty six bombs last season, and we need somebody that can hit. Who on this team right now can hit the ball like Kyas Sarberg needs somebody to hit.
Noboddy, we really could have used him.
You would have loved hitting at this park too. At one hundred home runs.
Oh my god, this is the best ballpark to do it at. He would have hit seventy five, set a new record.
Right, I guess. But at the same time, he would have could have. But it seems like we have correct him. If I'm wrong, Red's lady. But we've had a streak of guys coming here we're decent at the plate that can't hit. Great American ballbar I don't know why that, and it's been going on for twenty years.
Which is really odd. Right, this is the home.
I mean, he built this place short for Griffy in that short porch and he could eatn't what do you do?
It's built for balls to fly.
Yeah, there's a joke there that I'm gonna let go, but Barry, because I want Dave to edit that out and it'll be used with impunity.
On the Stooge Report at thirty.
Today, Barry Larkin said, I want to try to recruit his ass.
Turns out Barry Larkin can't even get him here, Lark and.
Can't get him, and I guess Lark wants to kick any extra five mel Yeah, Lark.
You're gonna ball out. It turns out that nobody could have gotten here. Money truly talks, man. Anybody else would have done it. For an extra twenty five million dollars, you would have left to the way it's set up. Man, He's like, I do love Cincinnati. That's cool and all take a twenty five million dollars haircut one hundred and six days until opening day. By the way, Okay, good are there. Rud's going to get somebody to hit.
That need somebody to come up and hit the ball.
We gotta figure that out, Yeah, we do. And also Tito the other day had said he was talking about Ellie da la Cruz.
We know that he was dealing with an injury in the second half of that season, and he goes, yeah, I wish I would have sat.
Ellie a little bit more. That was on me much Did we know about this.
Right in the way it was playing, Well, you knew something was there.
Of course, I've got an inside source that says, oh, yeah, we saw him walking around the clubhouse.
I don't think Gaffer doubling around.
It's a source. I don't think Gapper sees more than we did.
With those fuzzy eyeballs the screen, you can see.
A lot through those screens.
Look as someone that was the Easter Bunny at Tri County Mall for three seasons in a row.
It's amazing what you can see through those eyes.
I was the Easter Bunny from the age sixteen to eighteen years old.
At Trick County Mall.
Yes, I had grown men sitting on my lap and little kids drew things for me. So it's for a whole other day Wow, that's a whole other thing going on there.
That is a whole other thing.
What happens in the suit stays in the suit, thank you.
Except we will bring those stories of the airwaves someday.
Right.
That's enough with the Reds explained. Nothing else is going on with the Reds.
That's it. It's College Schwarber. We're done moving on.
We're not talking about the guy from Middletown anymore. I can't keep doing this. I'm not talking about the Big Red Machine and I'm not talking about Middletown.
We'll be talking about the Big Red Machine soon enough, once we.
Get into the season, as soon as the Bengals wrap up their season, because God knows that's happening.
We got the yeah good, Just a vicious circle, that's all it is.
It's Tony Perez babble night. Here we go, Here we go, Here we go. Get the whole big bobble line up. Every year hasn't been honored enough. Do something this century. Come on, y'all.
The Bengals. They're back at the jungle this Sunday. They're back at practice today, which is the lesser of the two evils. Joe Burrow is twenty nine today. By the way, that was trending on social media. The Bengals wished to my happy birthday. Happy birthday to Joe. You will be celebrating that at practice today because they are back at it after a couple of days off. Zach Taylor held a press conference on Monday, and he actually had a lot of information and to share with us. I'm sure
you've talked about it a ton on these airwaves. Finally got rid of Germaine Burton, who was contributing nothing to this team, making fifty six K a week or whatever crazy number it was when he made, Yeah, making an entire annual salary for.
Just seventy thousand years the game. I think of sixty nine to seventy somewhere around there. Yeah, I'm just simply not sleeping through practice, not showing up, and just like.
Going to the casino and not traveling with the team. And there's a bunch of allegations around him and unpaid bills and just weird things. But honestly, I agree with what Zach Taylor said. He goes, Look, I hope he's happy with his next adventure. Say, just get the help that you need. Though he needs some help.
I liked it.
He didn't throw shade at him and just like said, hey, we wish him all the best, good luck exactly, don't care.
He was very uh about the entire thing.
You have to be for the Brown family to pay you for not play?
Oh my right?
And what was to do with them holding on to him? I don't all wand I did.
It's like the lost Savior, lost car. And we're going to hear more of the Jermaine Burton start coming out now that he's no longer with the team, right, We're gonna hear more stories about what he actually didn't did or didn't do U to.
Want because we've seen the photos on social media trending where he's sitting at the casino, and we've seen the paperwork that there were some allegations with an ex girlfriend of his. A lot to get through and it sounds like he needs to get his mental health and check, which is very, very important.
And then but then that comes out now not even a part of the Bengals problem.
Okay, that's that's your name, but that's how much did that come back in the Bengals because you took this guy third round? He played what he had four catches last year.
In US was like, I don't even know why were your career?
I just wondered, shouldn't we be getting back to and based on what's happened with the defense and all this other stuff, is examining how they go about getting players. I mean, that's the big It's not Jermaine Burton going off the rails.
We're not good at draft.
Yeah, and how did you miss Son? Someone who's that mentally unstable?
It's sad, It's really it's a really sad situation. So Zach Taylor on my horse.
If you're the Bengals, I would think, Yeah.
Zach on Monday was like, I'm not going to give a reason. We're just parting ways. That's all there is to it. And the hits just really keep on coming. Uh uh, You're gonna need a lot of alcohol this weekend because I just checked the forecast for Sunday's games. Take off at one against the Ravens, a high of thirteen let's go thirteen degrees. That is some football weather. That ain't nothing for you.
I feel like, well, the thing was, there's no win. It's unusual because of the lake there and that wind is just awful.
I don't know how windy.
It wasn't windy at all. There you will see what the wind. I don't think the wind's going to die down after today, but it's going to be cold.
Yeah, so there's a hitting the ground. Keep Joe off the ground and those you know and Tea Haggins out.
You have like a Bengals Uh, you have like a bedazzled Bengal snowsuit that you wear to thost.
Absolutely not. I will be in the comfort of my home.
Watching she is Sarah Lisa snow get it straight back to the show tomorrow, Kid Chris Show one of two seven EB in the morning. The Snort Report on Wednesdays. Here not much to snort about with our teams again, you just got a left to care. I got you, I gotcha all right. It is a Scott's Flown show. Willie's on the way next afternoons. It's the home of the best Bengals coverage. Seven hundred Wally Sincenati