First Omaha mayor's debate shows top candidates jockeying to face Stothert
OMAHA — The first debate of the Omaha mayor's race spent Tuesday amplifying what increasingly looks like a four-way fight to join three-term Mayor Jean Stothert in the May 13 general election.
Stothert's top challengers in the nonpartisan April 1 primary — Democratic Douglas County Treasurer John Ewing, Republican former State Sen. Mike McDonnell and Democratic nonprofit executive Jasmine Harris — largely targeted the mayor and her record.
Also participating in the noon debate organized by WOWT and the League of Women Voters at the Omaha Press Club was community advocate Terry Brewer, who joined the race late.
Ewing, a former candidate for the U.S. House, and McDonnell, a former fire chief and fire union leader, criticized Stothert for focusing too much city time and money on the whims of some private developers.
Ewing said he wants the city to do a better job strategically planning development instead of being led around by the mayor's favored developers, state incentives and the 'hodgepodge' that results.
He told the Examiner that Omaha lags other Midwestern cities in growth because the city isn't doing enough outreach and recruitment of current and future employers seeking long-term ties.
'I absolutely love being a public servant,' Ewing said. 'It's what I've done all my adult life. I believe it's critically important that leaders keep their word.'
McDonnell repeated his criticisms of Stothert for wasting money on an outdated streetcar she promised she would let the people of Omaha vote on and didn't. He said the unpopular project should face voters.
During testy exchanges on public safety and services for the homeless, McDonnell sarcastically said Stothert has 'a lot of great ideas' and questioned why she hasn't implemented them in 12 years.
He mocked Stothert for taking credit for lowering the tax levy in Omaha, saying that reducing the increase in property taxes people pay is not a cut. He said she opposed state efforts to reduce property taxes.
'We have to control spending,' McDonnell said. 'The first day in office … we're going to zero out the budget and do performance-based budgeting. There's something going on here.'
Harris, a former U.S. Senate candidate who works with people returning to society from prison, jabbed at both Republicans for their handling of affordable housing and Omaha's homeless.
She said Omaha needs a better focus on connecting people without housing to the kinds of services that help them adjust to living in new surroundings with new responsibilities.
Harris said much of the root causes of the city's problems with public safety and homelessness are based on the lack of affordable housing being built, which the city could change.
She said people need more than just policing to feel safer, including a greater city focus on mental health care and substance abuse treatment.
'I'm not running for mayor to make it a career move,' Harris said. 'I wake up every day to figure out how I can make life better for the people of Omaha. People want a change.'
Ewing, Harris and Stothert criticized McDonnell for pushing a proposed state law that they said would have criminalized homelessness as ineffective and costly. McDonnell, who pushed a proposal to help police address homeless encampments, criticized Stothert for letting homelessness increase.
Stothert pointed to Omaha's growth during her three terms. She said it's too late to stop the streetcar project without getting the city sued. She said people care most about safety, taxes and roads.
Ewing and Harris agreed with Stothert that it was likely too late 'to stop the streetcar now.' Both said Omaha needs a mayor that makes sure the city's transportation system works for residents.
Stothert touted crime stats that show Omaha becoming safer, including just 19 homicides in 2024. She acknowledged needing more progress on juvenile crime and officer recruitment.
On Tuesday, she announced efforts to recruit more police officer candidates year-round and an effort to make sure Omaha pays more for police officers than any city in Nebraska.
'I love my job and I hope it shows,' Stothert said. 'We've had 12 years of determination, of progress and of success. … Omaha is moving forward in every way.'
McDonnell, after the debate, said he was pleased that Stothert was listening to him and the constituents that had come to him with criticisms of how she was not hiring enough police officers.
His political team acknowledged that McDonnell faces attacks from all sides as a new Republican running against a GOP incumbent for mayor. Stothert had Gov. Jim Pillen as a guest at her table.
'I know one thing the four of us have in common is we think there should be a new mayor,' McDonnell said of his experience in the first debate.
Stothert, after the debate, said it was gratifying to hear candidates agree with her rather than McDonnell that it is too late to stop the streetcar without putting the city in financial jeopardy because of signed contracts.
She also said it was too late for a public vote on the streetcar, and that the only group that could call for such a vote is the Omaha City Council, which has already approved the project.
Asked about being the target of other candidates Tuesday, Stothert, the city's longest-serving mayor, said it was old hat. She said she 'expects it.'
'They'll come and say you're doing everything wrong and they're going to do everything right,' Stothert said. 'But … we've got an excellent story to tell about the progress we've made over the last 12 years.'
Brewer spoke often about the need to help young people engage with education and job opportunities. He said Omaha needs to offer young people more options than the streets, sports or college.
'Discipline is the key for success for us,' Brewer said. 'I want to bring back programs that once helped me. I'm looking for the future of my babies … having a legacy.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
9 minutes ago
- USA Today
ICE detention is growing in the South. This state was the first.
Louisiana, long known for its 'prison economy,' now houses more ICE detention facilities than any other non-border state. WINN PARISH, LA – Far from the jazz clubs and nightlife of New Orleans, thousands await their fate inside immigration jails. Louisiana has more dedicated Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers than any other state besides Texas – nine total – after it converted nearly half a dozen correctional facilities to immigrant detention. Most are remote, scattered near farms and forests. Among the sites is a unique "staging facility" on a rural airport tarmac for rapid deportations. President Donald Trump is increasingly leaning on Republican-led Southern states to detain and deport millions of immigrants ‒ from "Alligator Alcatraz" in the Florida Everglades to the expansion of a sprawling Georgia immigration facility. Far from the U.S.-Mexico border, Mississippi has the ICE jail with the highest average daily population. But Louisiana was the first non-border state to surge immigration detention capacity, according to the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana and Tulane University Law School. The state opened five new facilities to detain immigrants in 2019, during the first Trump administration, and vastly expanded the number of detainees during the Biden administration. Immigrants are sent here from all over the country, far from their families, communities and, often, their lawyers. The Trump administration has confined some of its highest-profile detainees in Louisiana, including now-released Columbia University activist Mahmoud Khalil and Harvard University scientist Kseniia Petrova. The state's largest immigration jail, Winn Correctional Center, is tucked deep into dense pine woods nearly five hours northwest of New Orleans. The site is so remote that, for years, online maps routinely sent visitors the wrong way down a dirt road. A warning sign cautions visitors: "This property is utilized for the training of chase dogs." Other states might follow Louisiana's example as more federal funds flow to ICE detention. Congress recently authorized the Trump administration to spend $45 billion over the next four years to expand immigration jails around the country. That's nearly four times ICE's previous annual detention budget. USA TODAY traveled to four of Louisiana's nine ICE facilities, hoping to see firsthand what life is like for immigrants detained there. But the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement denied multiple requests for a tour of any of the locations. In an emailed statement, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said ICE originally expanded its detention capacity in Louisiana "to address the increasing number of individuals apprehended at the border" under the Biden administration. "ICE continues to explore all options to meet its current and future detention requirements while removing detainees as quickly as possible from the U.S.," she said. Nora Ahmed, legal director of the ACLU of Louisiana, described the state as key to Trump's promised mass deportation campaign. "Louisiana really is the epicenter for a lot of what is currently taking place with this administration," Ahmed said. "It's an outcropping of a prison economy that Louisiana has survived on for a long, long time." Deportation hub far from the border Louisiana found its foothold as a deportation hub at the end of Trump's first term, when the administration was looking to expand immigrant detention. The state had reformed its criminal justice system in 2017, with bipartisan support, to reduce sentences for low-level offenders. That had the effect of dramatically decreasing the state's prison population and freeing thousands of incarcerated people – mainly Black men and women. At the time, the Black imprisonment rate was nearly four times the rate of White imprisonment in Louisiana, according to the ACLU. Louisiana eventually rolled back the reforms. But racial justice activists briefly celebrated a win. Then ICE came knocking. The first Trump administration, and later the Biden administration, wanted to detain more illegal border crossers. Louisiana offered advantages: empty prisons, employees already trained in corrections, and access to the Alexandria airport with a detention facility and a history of deportation flights. It also has some of the country's most conservative immigration judges, as well as a federal appeals court that, in immigration cases, often sides with the government, lawyers say. "Louisiana had the infrastructure already there," said Homero López, legal director of New Orleans-based Immigration Services and Legal Advocacy, a nonprofit that provides free representation. "ICE comes in saying, 'Y'all have got the space. We've got the people. We'll pay you double what the state was paying.' That's why the expansion was so fast." Louisiana's rural communities offered advantages for ICE Many Americans know Louisiana by its crown jewel, New Orleans, the state's tourism mecca, where social norms and politics are as liberal as the flow of alcohol on Bourbon Street. But Louisiana is largely wooded, rural, proudly conservative and deeply Christian. County governments are called parishes and the poverty rate is the highest in the nation. "People want jobs and who's to blame them?" said Austin Kocher, a Syracuse University research assistant professor who studies immigration enforcement. "It's fairly easy to promise jobs by setting up a detention facility." Rural Louisiana used to make a living from oil and timber. Logging trucks still rumble down forested two-lane roads, but the decline in natural resources and price unpredictability drove some communities to look for new industries. Prisons and now immigration detention deliver good-paying jobs and economic development to places like Winn, Ouachita and LaSalle parishes. LaSalle was one of the first to see the potential. In 2007, local leaders in the parish seat of Jena – current population 4,155 – wanted to diversify the economy. A sprawling juvenile detention facility north of town sat empty. When GEO Group, the nation's largest private detention contractor, swooped in with an ICE contract in hand, local leaders welcomed the opportunity. "Not having to build an entirely new facility was probably a key factor to them locating here," said Craig Franklin, editor of the weekly Jena Times. Plus, "our advantage to a strong employee pool was likely a factor." In Ouachita Parish, the mayor and council of Richwood ‒ population 3,881 ‒ debated whether to approve an ICE detention contract. Mayor Gerald Brown didn't have a vote, but he supported the conversion to ICE detention, he said. "Richwood Correctional Center is one of our biggest employers," Brown told USA TODAY. "There was a lot of back and forth. We did town halls, and we had meetings." The town stood to gain new income as an intermediary between ICE and the private operator, LaSalle Corrections. When it was a jail, the town earned a $112,000 a year fee. Now that it's an ICE detention center, the town is getting about $412,000 a year. "The financial windfall for the community was something I certainly couldn't turn a blind eye to," Brown said. Remote ICE has consequences for the detained The willingness of rural communities to house ICE facilities is part of the draw to Louisiana, researchers who study immigration detention say. Another factor: When ICE tries to open new detention centers near big cities, the agency is often met with resistance from immigrant rights activists and residents with "not in my backyard" arguments. But attorneys say the rural locations have real consequences for the people detained. Data shows that having access to an attorney dramatically improves a detainee's chance of winning release and a chance at staying in the United States. But it's hard for attorneys to get to many of the facilities; Ahmed regularly drives three to seven hours to visit immigrant clients across the state. Baher Azmy, legal director of the New York-based Center of Constitutional Rights, represented Khalil, the Columbia University activist, during his more than three-month detention at the Central Louisiana Processing Center in Jena. He visited twice and said he was struck by its remoteness, the utter lack of space for attorneys to meet their clients and the no-contact family visitation conducted behind plexiglass. Accommodations were made for Khalil to see his wife and newborn baby in a separate room, after a court ordered it. "Getting there was an all-day proposition," Azmy said. "It reminded me of my early trips to Guantanamo," the military jail on the island of Cuba, where he represented clients accused of terrorism in the years after the 9/11 attacks. "The desolation, the difficulty getting there. The visiting conditions were better in Guantanamo than in Jena. As horrible as Guantanamo was, I could hug my client." According to ICE, rules and accommodations at different facilities can depend on their design and capacity, as well as contractual agreements. "Allegations that ICE detention facilities have improper conditions are unequivocally false and designed to demonize ICE law enforcement," McLaughlin said. "ICE follows national detention standards." Exponential expansion of ICE detention The United States has consistently grown its immigration detention through both Republican and Democratic administrations. But the average number of immigrants in detention on any given day has risen rapidly over the past six months, from roughly 40,000 people at the end of the Biden administration in January to more than 58,000 in early July. Under President Joe Biden, ICE moved thousands of migrants who sought asylum at the United States-Mexico border over to Louisiana detention centers, said the ACLU's Ahmed. Now, the centers are filled with people picked up in the country's interior. Nearly half of those in ICE detention in early July had no criminal record or pending charges, according to ICE data. They faced civil immigration violations. When determining whether to send a detainee to Louisiana, ICE considers bed space availability, the detainee's medical and security needs and proximity to transportation, according to an agency statement. The average daily population in Louisiana ICE facilities topped 7,300 in early July. That compares to roughly 2,000 ICE detainees in 2017 at the start of the first Trump administration, according to data collected by TRAC at Syracuse University. Some of that increase is due to a Trump administration decision to withdraw legal status from thousands of immigrants who arrived during the Biden administration and followed the rules then in place. "These are mothers. These are children. These are students. And these are individuals who often had status that was very much legal, that's then been taken away by the administration," Ahmed said. "So what we are seeing is the rendering of documented people to undocumented by the stroke of a pen of the United States government." More: He won asylum and voted for Trump. Now his family may have to leave. Three times this spring and early summer, Will Trim traveled to Richwood Correctional to visit his colleague Petrova, the Harvard scientist from Russia. He said the buildings looked "like warehouses, featureless beige buildings" encircled with razor wire, separated from a low-income neighborhood by a patch of woods. During his visits, few of the people he spoke with in the nearby town of Monroe knew that more than 700 immigrant women were being held locally. According to ICE data, on average, in July, 97% of the women in Richwood Correctional had no criminal record. "If they are being held without charge," he asked, "why is there double-barbed wire? Why is it hidden in the forest?" Dinah Pulver contributed to this report.
CNN
10 minutes ago
- CNN
Japan's minority government likely to lose upper house control, exit polls show
Japan's ruling coalition is likely to lose its majority in the upper house, exit polls showed after Sunday's election, potentially heralding political turmoil as a tariff deadline with the United States looms. While the ballot does not directly determine whether Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba's shaky minority government falls, it heaps pressure on the embattled leader who also lost control of the more powerful lower house in October. Ishiba's Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and coalition partner Komeito needed 50 seats to retain control of the 248-seat upper chamber in an election where half the seats were up for grabs. They are forecast to secure 32 to 51 seats, the exit poll by public broadcaster NHK showed. Other broadcasters forecast the ruling coalition would hold 41-43 seats. If the coalition holds less than 46 seats, it would mark its worst result since the coalition was formed in 1999. That comes on top of its worst showing in 15 years in October's lower house election, a vote which has left Ishiba's administration vulnerable to no-confidence motions and calls from within his own party for leadership change. Opposition parties advocating for tax cuts and tougher immigration policies look set to make gains, the exit polls showed, with rising consumer prices – particularly a jump in the cost of the staple rice – a key issue for voters. 'The LDP was largely playing defense in this election, being on the wrong side of a key voter issue,' said David Boling, a director at consulting firm Eurasia Group. 'Polls show that most households want a cut to the consumption tax to address inflation, something that the LDP opposes. Opposition parties seized on it and hammered that message home.' The LDP have been urging for fiscal restraint, with one eye on a very jittery government bond market, as investors worry about Japan's ability to refinance the world's largest debt pile. Adding to the anxiety around the world's fourth largest economy, Japan faces a deadline of August 1 to strike a trade deal with the United States or face punishing tariffs in its largest export market. The populist Sanseito party looked to be one of the big winners on the night, forecast to win 10-15 seats in the chamber, up from just one held previously. Sanseito's 'Japanese First' campaign and warnings about a 'silent invasion' of foreigners, have dragged once-fringe political rhetoric into the mainstream. 'I am attending graduate school but there are no Japanese around me. All of them are foreigners,' said Yu Nagai, a 25-year-old student who voted for Sanseito earlier on Sunday. 'When I look at the way compensation and money are spent on foreigners, I think that Japanese people are a bit disrespected,' Nagai said after casting his ballot at a polling station in Tokyo's Shinjuku ward.
Miami Herald
28 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
On Russia, Trump is just as foolish as Bush, Obama and Biden
Donald Trump gets a lot of guff from his opponents and a lot of love from his followers for being a different kind of politician than those who came before. And he sure is. But in at least one way, Trump is standard-issue. On Russia, Trump is amazingly conventional, following in the well-worn path of George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Joe Biden, all three presidents who came before his second term. Like his predecessors, Trump entered office wanting to give Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin the benefit of the doubt, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. It really is amazing given the timeline of Russian aggression under Putin's leadership, which began in 1999. George W. Bush When Bush first met Putin at a summit in Slovenia, he looked into the dictator's soul and found something good there. 'I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy,' Bush said, '… I was able to get a sense of his soul.' Bush had hopes of reforming the former Soviet state and bringing it into closer alignment with the West. Putin had other ideas, continuing a brutal war to suppress the independence movement in Chechnya and later invading Georgia in 2008 on the trumped up concerns that Russians in two Eastern provinces of the former Soviet republic wanted to break away. Barack Obama The next year, Obama came into office with top foreign policy hand Hillary Clinton at his side. The Democratic duo thought the problem with U.S.-Russia relations was the Republican they replaced, so they sought the famous 'reset' of relations. That was rewarded with the first invasion of Ukraine that included the capture of Crimea. Joe Biden When the most experienced president in 50 years, Biden, tottered into the White House in 2021, he was not foolish enough to say anything about a reset. He did think he could change the tenor of the relationship, 'cooling off' the confrontation in his aides' words. That was rewarded with the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Donald Trump Undeterred by the obvious pattern, Trump returned to office with plans to reach a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia within a day. That didn't happen. Russia instead escalated its bombing of Ukrainian cities to new heights. Now nearly six months into the new administration, Trump is frustrated and threatening to increase the supply of weapons to Ukraine's defenders, a move his critics suggested long ago and that Republicans themselves had suggested during the Biden administration's long, slow escalation of such aid to Kiev. It is amazing to me that such an intellectually diverse group of men could each rationalize themselves into the same foolishness. Perhaps one possible cause is the nastiness of our politics, where each president starts to believe that the guy who came before him didn't just have political differences, but instead was both evil and incompetent. Each in turn believed that the benighted fool who came before just didn't have the skill or intention of getting policy right. It is also comforting as you come into the White House to pretend that the opponents we face overseas are rational and competent, unlike our domestic opponents. It is harder to promise quick and easy solutions if you recognize Russia's leader as implacably vile. Now that Trump is rethinking his naive but traditional policy of hoping for the best from Putin, Americans need to engage in some hope themselves. Last time Trump was in office, he reportedly told Putin that if Russia invaded Ukraine, the United States would be bombing Moscow in short order. That's not a wise policy, either, and it's not one Trump should follow if Putin redoubles his efforts to conquer Ukraine. Trump came into office promising to keep the United States out of foreign wars. Arming the Ukrainians so they can do the fighting is the best way to do that. Hopefully Trump, like at least some of his predecessors, has figured that out.
