Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

[Kevin Butler]

[W]ill we see the full plan pertaining to the regional fire department and other "regional" plans on the City web site tomorrow?

There's no "full plan" (or partial plan) to consolidate fire services. We won a grant to study the pros and cons with other west shore municipalities. This was well documented. The grant-funded study is underway in all those communities. Please don't mistake this for a decision on anyone's part to regionalize fire.

I don't know of any other regional plans, as you call them.

[Kevin Butler]

There is no doubt your meetings are open, and the way of getting many things done over lunch and rides.

I don't understand this. If you mean Council gets things done over lunch or rides, I respectfully beg to differ. We all have day jobs -- it might be nice to get together for lunch, but it never happens. We get things done at City Hall in committee meetings.

It seems in this city that many decisions have been made before the committee has even been formed.

Not on council. Not in my experience. I know you're dedicated to Lakewood, Jim, but I can't remember the last time you were at a committee meeting. Come visit us if you find the time. You may be refreshed by the candor, and we always benefit from the input of those we represent.

Demanding more transparency and accountability is not a bad thing.

I agree that every citizen ought to demand transparency and accountability from every one of his or her elected representatives. I don't equate an unspecific allegation of illegality with a demand for transparency and accountability, though. Here we differ.

[Jim O'Bryan]

There is no doubt your meetings are open, and the way of getting many things done over lunch and rides.

I don't understand this. If you mean Council gets things done over lunch or rides, I respectfully beg to differ. We all have day jobs -- it might be nice to get together for lunch, but it never happens. We get things done at City Hall in committee meetings.

Kevin
I see some of the influences on City Council and I do find it troubling, and when I see the final decisions
it make me wonder, if we, the residents are seeing everything and hearing everything. There is the
case of the AT&T boxes, that I have dissected and dissected I have never found anything spoken
about in a public meeting that would make council vote for that. Where is that consensus drawn?

In my many lunches with your predecessor, as we would get up to leave he would turn and say,"well
what do you want?" and I would always say, just an update on what is going on, why do people ask
for things? His answer was always, "yes, well demand things..." No you and I have had the pleasure
of coffee, and as I told Shelly, you always seem very open to everything I ask. But I find it troubling
the seeming amount of power some people and groups have over the city.

It seems in this city that many decisions have been made before the committee has even been formed.

Not on council. Not in my experience. I know you're dedicated to Lakewood, Jim, but I can't remember the last time you were at a committee meeting. Come visit us if you find the time. You may be refreshed by the candor, and we always benefit from the input of those we represent.

Kevin

While I might be refreshed at the candor, it still leaves with perception problems.On some
of the last times I did have the pleasure of visiting, I say public questions cut short, and
many of the things going past as "Emergency Legislation." So that there would only be one reading. While none of this is illegal, it does create the perception...

Demanding more transparency and accountability is not a bad thing.

I agree that every citizen ought to demand transparency and accountability from every one of his or her elected representatives. I don't equate an unspecific allegation of illegality with a demand for transparency and accountability, though. Here we differ.

So in the area of transparency, you see no trouble with having the mayor and council members on the
board of LakewoodAlive, a group that he mayor and council approve and give funding too? Even funding
like the HUD money, that often finds it way into storefront redevelopment for other board members? That members of the committees that actually fund different programs are active in
the groups hey are deciding the funding on?

No transparency issues there?

Kevin, as always thank you for your time, on this subject and for what you do.


.

[Jim O'Bryan]

[W]ill we see the full plan pertaining to the regional fire department and other "regional" plans on the City web site tomorrow?

There's no "full plan" (or partial plan) to consolidate fire services. We won a grant to study the pros and cons with other west shore municipalities. This was well documented. The grant-funded study is underway in all those communities. Please don't mistake this for a decision on anyone's part to regionalize fire.

I don't know of any other regional plans, as you call them.

Kevin

This is exactly the kind of political answer that has driven me nuts for decades.

I used to ask Mayor Cain what the second phase of the WestEnd on her desk was. After
all the groundwork that was laid with sewers and widening Riverside was obviously
not just for some funky little strip mall.

Her answer was always I have no plans called "The Second Phase" on "my desk." Finally I started
to noticed the legalese of naming things as saying exactly where they were noted not to be. So
I would play along and change the name every time I asked her. "Part Duex" "Phase 3" "The Continuation..." But never go a real response.

Of course years later when I received all the paper work from Rick Foran, we found out it was
the Cliffs project, then a possible hotel, turning Park Row into parking, and on and on until it
lead right to the steps of McKinley that had oddly just been decommissioned by Jay Foran and
the 50-year committee. Hmmmmmm brother developing the area, while one clears the land.
Damn, had I only guessed "The Cliffs" and the 2 file cabinet on the right in the third drawer down, and...

No one understands more than I that some things cannot be talked about. I always use the Aldi's
store as a prime example. But at the same time, we certainly need and have every right to known
and understand where out council stands on regionalization, and this fire department plan. I hope
and believe it is not done as a straight up and down vote after reading the last page of studies and
summaries. I have a box of bogus ones from other administrations that have proven to me that
simply does not work fairly or with enough transparency.

While I am not equating the MAdeline Cain administration with the Ed FitzGerald administration
you can certainly understands my concerns, and the concerns of others.

Again thanks as always for stepping in. I am sure some of this is tough to read, and or answer.

.

[Kevin Butler]

This is exactly the kind of political answer that has driven me nuts for decades.

I'm not mincing words. The fire study is just a study. I've heard of no other plans regarding consolidation of boundaries or services, or whatever we might call "regionalism." I've seen nothing that would suggest any group has undue influence over your local elected officials when it comes to these issues. I don't know how else to say it.

At some point, Jim, you're going to have to choose either to believe me or not to.

N.B. on AT&T Uverse: What you appear to be asking for is an explanation on why we voted for it. I can only speak for myself, and I have done so previously on this very site. For instance:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2696&start=105

[Rhonda loje]

Quote from Kevin Butler:

I've seen nothing that would suggest any group has undue influence over your local elected officials when it comes to these issues.

Kevin,
The problem is the appearance of influence.

When 2 members of City Council sit on the Board of Directors of LakewoodAlive.
And LakewoodAlive receives the majority of it general funding from CBDG money.
And council makes the final decision on distribution of these funds.

Even if no inpropriety has occured.
The appearance does not look good.
And any citizen should question that appearance.

My question is this the only CDC or non-profit that Council distributes funds to that it members also sit on it's Board of Directors? If so that makes it even more unusual. And the appearance then triggers more questions.

I am a citizen just asking questions.

Rhonda Loje

[Shelley Hurd]

I'm not mincing words. The fire study is just a study. I've heard of no other plans regarding consolidation of boundaries or services, or whatever we might call "regionalism."

Kevin,

If Lakewood is in “the worst financial crisis since the great depression”, and our Council and Mayor are wasting better used time and precious financial resources’ for and on a project that they have zero intention of implementing, you people really have no right to hold any public office.

Or maybe you are trying to be “savvy”(per direction of the plans instructions) and are engaging in word play to dissuade opposition?

Or maybe someone forgot to send you some paper work. As a “Stakeholder” you really should be checking into that kind of over sight.

Formation of an intermunicipal Council of Governments
Formal written contract to shareservices and expenses
Accomplished

Request for qualifications and interviews of potential consulting firms
A nationwide search using objective, measurable criteria, and an invitation to select firms to make a presentation
Accomplished

Hire an experienced consultant to guide the process
Formal legal agreement among the Westshore COG, particular to this effort
Accomplish by
10/2009

Comprehensive evaluation of current financial, personnel, legal, and service level conditions
Review of all available data, stakeholder input, and site visits by consulting firm
Accomplish by
02/2010


Formulate & endorse a Strategic Plan for interagency cooperative services as the Westshore Fire
District
Formal legal agreement among the Westshore COG, dedicated to this phase of the project
Accomplish by
04/2010

Formation of Task Forces to develop and implement action plans that correlate with the goals
identified in the Strategic Plan Fire chiefs to head up task forces and select individuals from each
organization as members of these teams
Accomplish and report
results by
12/2010

Formally begin operations as Westshore Fire District
Intermunicipal legal agreement by the Westshore COG that establishes a governing board for the new Fire District
Accomplish by
06/2011
(http://www.efficientgovnow.org/FileUplo ... oposal.pdf)

[Shelley Hurd]

Kevin,

You stated:

There's no "full plan" (or partial plan) to consolidate fire services. We won a grant to study the pros and cons with other west shore municipalities. This was well documented. The grant-funded study is underway in all those communities. Please don't mistake this for a decision on anyone's part to regionalize fire.
I don't know of any other regional plans, as you call them.

Approximately eight per cent ($100,000) of the recurring annual savings will be used to hire a regional Westshore Sustainability Manager. This individual will increase operational efficiency and sustainability best practices thereby reducing costs throughout the Westshore region. The Sustainability Manager will be responsible for creating, implementing, managing, and maintaining various sustainability policies, programs, and projects, which will impart significant benefits to our constituents, including cleaner air, cleaner water, reduced carbon footprints, lower municipal energy costs, and the redirection of tax dollars into similar community priorities such as economic development and related sustainability
projects. (http://www.efficientgovnow.org/FileUplo ... oposal.pdf)

I am not very bright, however. My interpretation of “. ..

The Sustainability Manager will be responsible for creating, implementing, managing, and maintaining various sustainability policies, programs, and projects,” … “and the redirection of tax dollars into similar community priorities such as economic development and related sustainability projects.

…Means, there will be additional (“various”) “programs and projects” (ie, services, schooling?) which will be regionalized.

If I am way off in my interpretation of the language, please provide the correct interpretation. I merely wish to fully understand what’s going on.

And please, if I have mis- spoken in any way. Or mis represented any facts, please correct them. My intent is full disclosure, not mis representation.

My intend is also to ensure residents are allowed to truely have a voice in what changes occur with the Distribution of our tax dollars, and in the direction Lakewood moves forward.

This means we must be allowed to be engaged in the process and decision making BEFORE its a done deal and contractually committed to by City Hall.

Because in the end, residents are the only “Stakeholders” in this little game.

[Stephen Eisel]

I just don't get it... Is new bad? A church is knocked down to make way for a new building. Would we rather have a bunch of empty abandoned old churches throughout lakewood? ( I am just asking) Should we not be happy that so many new businesses are popping up in Lakewood?

Stephen

I suppose if you are able to disceet each and ever moment from each and every
moment and cannot see a larger picture or a larger issue, then yes a new building is
better than an old one. Well maybe. But if we are going to look at a much larger real
issue, one might start with how did we get here, and who was driving that bus.

Why did we spend so much to try to keep flowers alive, on Detroit?

Why do we have 4 different programs getting paid good money, to help 6 blocks of
Lakewood and it seem there are less businesses there than when they started?
Could we maybe do without one of the programs?

If as was pointed out here a couple months ago, NO ONE actively looking to help new businesses
should Lakewood direct some money to LA? The Chamber? MAMA? Downtown? Mainstreet? DADA?
to try and look for someone?

Does the entire voting public really want to be part of Cleveland, ot the cooler CLE+ or do some
have another idea that might be worth looking at before we pretned we are the French during WWII?

Why do we always close schools within eyesite of a strip mall project?

I believe the only battle cry to come out of the WestEnd was "responsible development"
and honesty. Both were missing, and the players are still playing.

You know one of those wacky accountability thingys you seem to come and go with.

FWIW


.

Jim, I was just asking "Is new bad?"

[Jim O'Bryan]

I just don't get it... Is new bad? A church is knocked down to make way for a new building. Would we rather have a bunch of empty abandoned old churches throughout lakewood? ( I am just asking) Should we not be happy that so many new businesses are popping up in Lakewood?

Stephen

I suppose if you are able to disceet each and ever moment from each and every
moment and cannot see a larger picture or a larger issue, then yes a new building is
better than an old one. Well maybe. But if we are going to look at a much larger real
issue, one might start with how did we get here, and who was driving that bus.

Why did we spend so much to try to keep flowers alive, on Detroit?

Why do we have 4 different programs getting paid good money, to help 6 blocks of
Lakewood and it seem there are less businesses there than when they started?
Could we maybe do without one of the programs?

If as was pointed out here a couple months ago, NO ONE actively looking to help new businesses
should Lakewood direct some money to LA? The Chamber? MAMA? Downtown? Mainstreet? DADA?
to try and look for someone?

Does the entire voting public really want to be part of Cleveland, ot the cooler CLE+ or do some
have another idea that might be worth looking at before we pretned we are the French during WWII?

Why do we always close schools within eyesite of a strip mall project?

I believe the only battle cry to come out of the WestEnd was "responsible development"
and honesty. Both were missing, and the players are still playing.

You know one of those wacky accountability thingys you seem to come and go with.

FWIW


.

Jim, I was just asking "Is new bad?"

was just answering.


.

[Stephen Eisel]

good answer then

[Mike Davis]

Jim,
Regarding your demeaning comment about the 2009 Light up Lakewood event.

The facts are:

Well over 100 businesses and individuals contributed MONEY, time and made in-kind donations to help make this years event very successful.

Any exterior decorative lighting that may have been installed on Detroit, Madison, or Lakewood Park, this year or in past years, is owned, maintained and instlled by the city of Lakewood. Where or in what quantity the city decides to install exterior decorative lighting is their decision and should have no connection to an individuals perception of success or failure of the collective volunteer efforts of the 100s of lakewwod residents that gave of their time and money to make this event the success that it was.

PS. The area chosen to be the focus of the Mainstreet efforts was chosen at a community meeting hosted by the Lakewwod Chamber of commerce, held at the Beck Center and attend by over 300 interested residents.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Mike

Go back and read the comment and settle down.

The first year of Light up Lakewood the lights were taken down in Lakewood Park
and brought up to Detroit as were other Christmas items from around the city. Not
this year.

I am certainly not demeaning any volunteer in this but have a real issue
with some of the paid management at LakewoodAlive.

As for the logo, I have rough drafts from Steve Noble that have that sign it from before
the meeting ever happened, and also find the "DowtowN" sign in another Mainstreet city
Mt. Vernon to be almost identical. Chance? I suppose could be. But knowing the
management I find it highly unlikely.

I believe the LO was down for at least $3,200 but was never mentioned, but that is
the publisher's deal I suppose not mine. To my knowledge, I have to believe that the LO
has given more to LakewoodAlive than any business outside of Lakewood Hospital and the
City of Lakewood. That said I am proud and happy to do it. However, the PAC leadership
must move on or it just looks like they are using my tax dollars to force their political
agenda and regionalism down my throat, and in the end ruin this very unique and
beautiful city. But as I said to someone last night. Those are my thoughts, I believe
in the end everyone must make up their own minds what they want this city to be like.

There are some tremendous people at LakewoodAlive Mikell Anne Rensel, Curt Brosky,
and Jack Gustine to name but a few. Now is the time to drop the PAC charade at let
Mikell Anne do her thing.

Mike, if I sound cranky, was up till 5am making sure a story about Light Up Lakewood and
the Living Windows made it into the Lakewood Observer.

peace

[Shelley Hurd]

Kevin,

Is it City Halls intention to infer, that your (the collective of Council and Mayor) apparent refusal to respond and or address the questions posed to you earlier in this thread, residents will be denied any right to input concerning the regionalization (or not regionalizing) of our fire department until it is already contractually agreed ( or not agreed) upon by the city? Do residents even have any rights pertaining to this matter?

Also, are we allowed to request to be let in on the plan (if a plan were to exist) of what other services and school matters might become entwined in regionalism? What are residents permitted to be informed of pertaining to matters such as these?

The Sustainability Manager will be responsible for creating, implementing, managing, and maintaining various sustainability policies, programs, and projects,” … “and the redirection of tax dollars into similar community priorities such as economic development and related sustainability projects. (http://www.efficientgovnow.org/FileUplo ... oposal.pdf)

Also, "The Sustainability Manager will be responsible for creating, implementing, managing, and maintaining various sustainability policies, programs, and projects,” .

Does that mean once set up (if set up) the “Sustainability Manager” will be making the decisions pertaining to how and what gets regionalized? Will residents then be allowed any input? Or will these issues be completely and permanently removed from the City of Lakewood and or we residents hands?

[Kristine Pagsuyoin]

Shelley,

I thought I would bring this thread back a little to your original posting. Being that I have a passion for education and because I am still in that stage of my life where I have school-aged kids, I have chosen to focus on schools. I don’t know an awful lot about our city council. It is my understanding that City Council and the School Board hold their meetings on Monday nights at the same time. So, I have chosen to attend school board meetings and can speak to that.

I have been frustrated about what seems to be lack of cohesion or outcry from parents and the community on school issues. It seems like there is a few of us who are trying to hold our board members and administration accountable. And so, we have been labeled and in some cases even ignored if we have questions or concerns. Yet, I have seen what an organized effort can achieve when people care. For example, when there was a change to the 5th grade health program (parents were not consulted beforehand) parents organized and their concerns were addressed (5th grade health stayed put).

I have personally talked to many parents who are upset about school decisions or the prospect of their school closing. Many of them will attend a meeting; however, most will not allow their voices to be heard because they are fearful their children will be experience some kind of retribution in school for speaking up. Many Lakewood employees (teachers, coaches, etc.) will not speak up when they think something is wrong out of fear of losing their job. It is very frustrating.

Over the last year or so I have attended almost every school board meeting, but for many reasons I couldn’t attend many meetings in spring/summer. It always makes me wonder why more people don’t show up to the meetings. Are they all watching it on cable? Are they reading the minutes?

There is some big stuff going on. Budget cuts, school closing, bond and building issues…at some point people have to take on the responsibility of actively trying to find out what is going on with their schools and to ask questions when they have concerns.

It is true that when citizens don’t show up that the BOE assumes that they agree with their decisions. They believe they are trusted. Unless people say otherwise, can you blame them? I went to the BOE meeting last week. The agenda is posted so a citizen knows what is to be discussed at the meeting. There were maybe 4 citizens (the same attendees) who attended. This meeting addressed the levy that will be on the ballot May 5th, how much, why and so forth. I found out there will be lay-offs. We still don’t know when a decision on Phase III will be made.

After Chas Geiger retired, Committee of the Whole meetings ceased to exist. There are occasionally open meetings that the public can attend other than regular BOE meetings. They had 2 for Phase III and there was a budget meeting on a Saturday before Christmas, for example.

I have NEVER witnessed any real discussion on any issues between BOE members at a regular school board meeting. It seems like all of the discussion and a decision has been reached before the regular meeting.

I can’t explain why no one ran against our current BOE members in the last election. I know that many had expressed that they would and I was excited about that. It is too bad that they didn’t. A couple of individuals complained when I got permission to put up a flier at Grant about a recent public Phase III meeting. However, and it is amazing to me, most of the parents I talked to on the first morning of passing out fliers did not know about the meeting, nor did they know their school was at-risk for closing. Much of that is due to the poor communication from the Board on this issue—I don’t want to re-post all that has been said on another thread. My point is that trust has to be two-sided. I’ve heard BOE members complain that people should trust them. I believe that it is the job of elected officials to gain our trust and not the other way around.

Kristine