What I have against business - nothing

[Charyn Compeau]

..

[dl meckes]

Now the next step is getting our local visionaries to envision some good things for Lakewood.

What do you want to see? Because if you can see it, it can happen.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Charyn

Let's be honest here for a moment. Was it not you that explained to all that it is wrong to have little secret kabals working in secret and that the VAL should come out into the open of daylight. For over two months if you go back to the beginning of your train of thought on this I have explained that much like the Observer, the VAL could not get more open. In fact the day I met you I talked with you and Mike about items in the VAL and that you should talk to other members. You never made the effort. You also sat on the board of the Observer for a little over a week, but never made the meetings, in your defense I think you were sick that week, and the LO and Charyn and Mike went separate ways. No matter your involvement is still strong, and you are doing what you can to test the ideas that flow out of members of the Observer.

My only statement with the Buzz, The Chamber, City Hall, etc. is; Why do you not hold these groups to the same standard you insist on holding us to? Why is it after your brief moment on the board, that you hold us to a higher standard?

I mean let's be honest you know how open and how organized the Lakewood Observer is, no one has ever kept anything from you, and from your short time here everything you asked for was ordered and sits on a shelf. We are so open when you wanted to help you were welcomed with open arms, and nothing to fill out. You were never asked about religion, political agenda, height, weight, age, taxable income, nothing. You like others mentioned an idea, or plan of action and we tried to muster what we could to help.

I have been told by many this would never work. I was told before it started, at 100 members, 200 members, 300 members and now 500 members. That trust and respect will not work in Lakewood. I am happy everyday that we all are proving them wrong. Of course as we found out at our last lunch, many cannot handle respect, trust or equality. I did a brief count yesterday between writers, advertisers, Deck Members and others we are quickly closing in on 5% of Lakewood being involved. Some only post once in awhile, some only deliver papers, some only write about the groups they are member in. It does not matter we are all equal once you walk through the digtal door.

All I ask is that the Lakewood Observer be judge fairly, and judge the same way you judge ever other group in Lakewood. Should they all decide to be as open as we are at the Observer this city would be moving forward at Lightspeed.

Charyn you often use rolling eyes, or the whewwwwwww when we are kicking it with me. I always take this to mean utter frustration on your part. Imagine how I feel, when the most open inclusive group in Lakewood is constantly being called elitist, secret, private, etc.

DL

It was Ed Favre that started the Bike Lakewood movement, the Lakewood Observer facilitated the growth. The Lakewood Observer has always offered to help pay for bike racks. Currently I do not agree with the position taken by Bike Lakewood, they are falling way short of the vision that was first struck. When they turned to buying bike racks with tax dollars I asked to be taken off the list though we still host their discussion board and run the articles in the paper. This was ME not the Observer taking MY time bank into other things that do not burden the system that is already over burden. Again I want to make sure EVERYONE understands that my charity/civic work has nothing to do with what The Lakewood Observer does. Members of the Observer have found a company willing to cast Bike Lock rings for less than a lunch for 4 at The Place To Be. MYSELF I cannot with a clear conscious have an 80 year old non biker pay for a place to lock my bike up. You and I often have similar discussion over the arts. My little bit for keeping taxes lower, do what we can without tax dollars.

Tim has the energy and the love for biking that will take Lakewood far, I thank him for the opportunity to help when we can, and love running his stories.

DL/Charyn

Could you two share notes on this email deal. I know the difference between gathering email and farming email. Gathering is done by an outside group hacking in. Farming is when the website makes people sign into to get "involvement" up and to create web lists they can sell to others.

The Lakewood Observer has promised our LISTS will NEVER be shared or sold to ANYONE or ANY GROUP. If this is really a problem, and to be honest Charyn I do the same and have never gotten spammed using my LO account. I would like to see it fixed. On the LO Paper Member site we created a special algorithm that stores all email, phone numbers etc. scrambled.

Thanks to both of you for taking part. You both work so hard to keep me honest and on track I am very lucky.

Apology, never mind:roll:



.

[dl meckes]

I apologize to Ed Favre for not properly crediting him. I know he has done a LOT of work to move from idea to reality.

And as for email farming, we don't and will never do that. We don't share information and we don't sell information, period.

We allow anyone to read the open discussion areas without signing in.

[Joan Roberts]

For the record, I have never accused anyone of being anti-business.

The dispute is in to what extent parties see the need for an influx of new businesses to provide jobs and an enhanced tax base.

My issue is that the attitude seems to be, "well, if someone wants to open an ice cream stand, that's great, but what's the point of trying to get a robotics factory?"

I say, there's a big point. I say you're never going to build and sell enough high-end condos to make the ctiy solvent.

And speaking of condos, do we want to be Del Boca Vista any more than we want to be Avon Lake? Just, you know, askin'

As for my choice to live here and then wanting to change it, when I lived here before, taxes (at least property taxes) were lower. And there are several mid-scale companies not operating from when I lived here earlier. So I don't want to change it to something entirely diferent.

However, I would like to change it BACK.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Joan

I agree with everything you have said. My only questions from day one is what is that medium large company, where do we put it, and how much will it cost us to get them here?

Lakewood has to work to keep taxes as low as we can, but from there it gets complicated really quickly.

I think you would have to agree that if Lakewood could regain the 13,000 residents we have lost that it would also be a huge step in rebuilding and sharing our tax burden.

Thanks for the clarification.



.

[Jim O'Bryan]

And as for email farming, we don't and will never do that. We don't share information and we don't sell information, period.

We allow anyone to read the open discussion areas without signing in.

DL

I am sure Ed is not looking for credit or kudos, not his style. Just setting the record straight.

As for the email I want to thank you for the hard work looking at the complete list of emails that the Observer has access to. I do find it odd that we have gotten only a couple "spams" and Charyn is complaining of hundreds? Of course our email was never posted and her's was I believe in a couple of her posts with her company's name.

If you two could compare notes and maybe find the fault I would appreciate it.


.

[DougHuntingdon]

If you post your email online anywhere, there is a good chance that a webcrawling spam spider is going to pick it up. That is why disposable email addresses are a good idea.

Doug

[Jim O'Bryan]

If you post your email online anywhere, there is a good chance that a webcrawling spam spider is going to pick it up. That is why disposable email addresses are a good idea.

Doug

Doug

DL who heads up 4 Design and myself have designed sites together and apart since the net started. They range in size from 1 page to Racing for America with over 50,000 pages. If there is one thing we are aware of it is how this problem works and how websites work.

The Lakewood Observer has gone out of our way to make sure our private informaion is private, and that our posted information is public. This is why I rang the alarm bells when one person reported problems. It might be only one person but we try to make sure there is no security breaches with the information trusted to us.

While I agree that disposible email addresses are nice.



.

[Shawn Juris]

Seems that there is no shortage of space in Lakewood. I don't think that is the problem. As for the cost to attract them. If Lakewood is really as attractive as we would like to believe then it shouldn't be hard. Otherwise we can always abate half of their property tax rate and to compete with whoever else they are considering. If they need upgrades to come here, well hey it benefits us too. Just so long as we always charge them at least $1/year on a lease. Two likely suspects for struggling to fill our business needs are high taxes which we've beat to death, and ease of doing business. I look through a list of jobs and think, why not more in Lakewood. Whether it's a construction company, nursing, legal, education, IT, financial services, etc. I see no reason why they can't be set up on Detroit or Madison. Let's not jump to conclusions that because we don't want a mall or a factory that the answer is just adding residents instead of jobs. Before we come up with a wish list of industries which I think we all can agree with goes beyond retail and would be limited in the manufacturing sector to clean or light, I'd be interested in how easy it is to set up shop in Lakewood. I've only had a few anecdotal experiences and I'd be interested to know how we compare with the cities that are doing well.
Once we know that the system can accept new prospects then we're at the point to recruit and solicit or just simply accept businesses that can set up shop in a 1,000-4,000 sq ft office. The cost of streamlining the set up of new businesses is not a luxury it's an imperitive.

To the question about bringing back the 13,000 residents. I don't see how this is the answer. First of all, the property is still being taxed regardless of occupancy so you wouldn't be adding to your base. In fact one may argue that the added residents will actually increase overhead costs resulting in a need for more tax dollars. Second, if you mean all the new builds going around like Rockport and Rosewood, those new residents will need service too so their taxes will not be surplus. I think that new builds solve our other issue of an aging housing stock and keep things fresh but it doesn't do much to fix this issue.

[DougHuntingdon]

<<<<Of course our email was never posted and her's was I believe in a couple of her posts with her company's name. >>>>

Jim I was *agreeing* with you on the emails.

If I put an email address here, like this: dougiscool@lakewood44107.com

it is likely to get picked up by a spam robot, sooner or later, whether in a day or in 3 years. dougiscool@lakewood44107.com will likely start to receive spams for cell fones, Nigerian investments, windmill start up companies, etc.

I was not referring to email addresses kept by LO of registered users.

I am sure everyone appreciates that you are very diligent in protecting user data.

I was not insulting your intelligence or knowledge of the internet, although the rest of us aren't all blind camels, either. No offense meant to anyone who may be visually impaired or who raises camels.

Doug

[Joan Roberts]

Joan

lly quickly.

I think you would have to agree that if Lakewood could regain the 13,000 residents we have lost that it would also be a huge step in rebuilding and sharing our tax burden.

Thanks for the clarification.



.

But you see, the only way that would happen is if we created completely new living spaces. More residents in the same number of existing housing units does nothing to increase property taxes.

You're forgetting property taxes and property taxes are what's killing people, not Lakewood's income tax, which is pretty much the same as everyone's.

Example. A half-empty double is appraised at $125,000. Fill up the other half and while you have another person paying income tax, the appraisal is still $125,000. Net benefit to schools=0. Net relief to existing property owners=0.

Now, let's take another example. Look at the rental car lot on 1-90 and Warren. Don't know what it's appraised at, but if someone could schmooz a developer to put a Hampton Inn, say, on this logical site, the appraisal would no doubt rise. The value of adjoining properties would also rise.
Plus everyone who worked the desk and cleaned the rooms would contribute income tax. That's a net plus to both the city and schools.

Sure, you could put condos there, too. But the market for condos in NE Ohio is limited (because full houses are so cheap). I'm not sure how the Rockport Square developers feel about their results and what they disclose to their close associates.

All I know is that in Vegas and Vancouver, people are buying condos "on spec" before the first shovel of earth is turned, figuring they'll be worth double before the paint is finally dry. To say that's not the case here would be an understatement.

And we'd STILL be totally relying on our residents to foot the bill for both the city where they work and the city where they live..

This is not about eminent domain. This is about understanding necessities and possiblities.

As for what the businesss are and where do you put them, I believe Mr. Jordan receives an envelope twice a month to come up with those specifics.

[Lynn Farris]

So Joan, what I hear you saying and what I totally agree with - is we need a mechanism to switch property tax to income tax for the schools.

Currently the income tax that the schools are allowed is not good as I understand it - but a joint income tax with the city is a good idea.

If we could get the city and the schools to roll back some of the property tax and add a joint income tax for both the schools and the city that would make some sense.

This way the people that are paying are the people that are earning money - not the retired senior citizen or the recently outsourced citzen who is trying to figure out a way to make ends meet. And it taxes all the people that work in our city that don't live here - e.g., the city workers, the teachers, the hospital employees.

Then what Jim is discussing - filling up the apartments and half houses really truly brings the tax relief. And this type of tax grows with income growth and isn't stagnant until another levy like it is now.

The alternative would be to get the state officials to fix the problem - but I think Lakewood could do it themselves through this mechanism faster.

[Shawn Juris]

Joan, I don't hear you suggesting a change in tax distribution between income tax and property tax at all. Then again maybe that was just because I seem to side with you on this one.
Out of curiosity are the new condos being touted as a solution in any way to this tax issue by anyone other than Jim? Has city hall or anyone on council claimed that the availability of new condos will solve anything other than providing new property to attract people to the city?
Last on the comment about filling half houses and apartments bringing true tax relief... I have to say, not so much. Again we're already collecting tax on those vacant homes so it will not create relief on the property tax side. The additional income tax is welcome but I'm not convinced that 13,000 more residents will not change the needs of the city services to offset whatever benefit they may bring. Further question would be did the operating budget decrease for city services and schools after we lost these 13,000 residents. If so then we can have something real to discuss on a cost per resident basis rather than simply siding with more business or more residents. To clarify one last time since I'm holding my breath for the response, more business does not mean displacing current residents or attracting a franchised bomb factory.

[Charyn Compeau]

..