AutoRecycling--yes,Parking ban--no,residents to fight it out

[Betsy Voinovich]

Happy Tuesday morning!

So at last night's Council meeting it was decided that there will be auto-recycling, complete with new garbage cans, and new trucks, but no parking ban.

Because the residents are allowed to put the recycling bins in the street the night before pickup, they will essentially create their own parking ban.

That's the beauty of it according to Council.

Residents can put their cans in the street the night before, and if people coming home after that can't park on the street, then they can't. They will have to find somewhere else to park. (Unless they get out of their cars and move the can up onto the tree lawn so they can park. It probably depends which street you live on..)

And if you're putting your recycling can out in the morning, and the street in front of your house is occupied with some parked cars? Then what? You knock on the doors of your neighbors to try to see whose car that is so they can move it so you can get that recycling can into the street?

What if you can't find who owns the car? What if they refuse to move it? How long is all of this going to take anyway?

Is this a good example of residential self-rule, or an impossibility imposed from the City, which is then shirking its responsibility to enforce it? Or something in between?

I'm not sure, I'm just throwing it out there. I wasn't at the meeting i just heard about it.

I have to say, I'm happy that there won't be a parking ban-- but I'm not sure what kind of interactions I'm going to be witnessing in the street as people try to get their recycling out.

According to Council, this is going to save us thousands of dollars. I wonder what the dollar-value is of the hassle to the neighbors and their relationships with each other.

I realize that this will have very little impact on the residents who live on streets where there are no apartments and no two-family houses. All of the headache and heartache will be experienced by the people who live on streets where residents actually have to park on the street.

Or maybe this will work fine and I'm just being paranoid; I've been accused of that before.

Here's a Cramps song to listen to which I'm sure will help everybody sort it out.



Betsy Voinovich

[Matthew Lee]

I wish I could have been there last night but was flying home from Chicago for work.

The question I have asked before, but still have no answer:

"Why can't trash pickup be done on one day and recycling on another?"

Somehow, I think we are all smart enough to know that, for example, trash will be Monday and recycling on Tuesday.

Then, we have no parking bans, no bins in the street, and everyone is happy.

Why can't the city just schedule the pickups on different days?

[Jim O'Bryan]

...
Because the residents are allowed to put the recycling bins in the street the night before pickup, they will essentially create their own parking ban.

That's the beauty of it according to Council.

Residents can put their cans in the street the night before, and if people coming home after that can't park on the street, then they can't. They will have to find somewhere else to park. (Unless they get out of their cars and move the can up onto the tree lawn so they can park. It probably depends which street you live on..)

...According to Council, this is going to save us thousands of dollars. I wonder what the dollar-value is of the hassle to the neighbors and their relationships with each other.

I realize that this will have very little impact on the residents who live on streets where there are no apartments and no two-family houses. All of the headache and heartache will be experienced by the people who live on streets where residents actually have to park on the street.

Here we are balancing the budget on the backs of the residents solely, instead of on the
backs of businesses the residents have invested in with the promise of the return of more
tax dollars for the city, and less burden on the residents.

Well I suppose those that promised huge dividends from that are the same ones promising
thousands of dollars of saving from making every Lakewoodite spend up to $1,000 a year
on their own effort to keep up with the lame plan from city hall and the people playing
Sim City with our city and behaviors.

I have to agree with a growing number of Lakewood residents.

These guys are in over their head.

They know how to cut, but they do not know how to manage.

Matt, is right, why not one day.

Why not the way it works now.

Why the social engineering by a failed businessman?

Why is City Hall working so hard to make this city so much worse than when they came in?

I just do not get it.

.

[Paul Schrimpf]

Honest to God, they can keep their stinking can. I will take the stuff to the dump myself. With all due respect, this is a really bad idea. Really.

Was it unanimous?

[Jim O'Bryan]

Honest to God, they can keep their stinking can. I will take the stuff to the dump myself. With all due respect, this is a really bad idea. Really.

Was it unanimous?

Paul

Nosetly, the last change to trash collection was a bad idea, sold to us with voodoo economics,
that it would seem most Lakewood residents never seemed willing to do the math on.

While I respect Ed FitzGerald for the way he did it, the plan was at best mediocre, and
harmful to Lakewood, if for no other reason homogenization Lakewood into being like the
rest. The big savings last time was based on over 5 years, with any real savings coming
from people retiring. While it seems to be well accepted and the trash collectors seem to
enjoy not lifting as many cans. Financially I do not believe it has even broken even yet.
Let alone save us money.

The same is being promised with this new move. Only the return has been mentioned in
thousands of dollars a year. Last I heard $40,000 that would also come from retirement
not any part of the process of the new plan to socially engineer us into being whatever
their final mad scientist goal is.

When I say do the math, it is a complicated formula. New barrels reported to cost over
$400,000. So if it saves $40,000 a year that would be ten years to break even. However,
it does not end there. What it does is shell game of government. Who does the work and
what do they pay and earn. In this case, we take on a greater burden through
implementation (getting it to the truck, carrying back cans, storage of the cans as additional
space, and then the parking issue.

"I realize that this will have very little impact on the residents who live on streets where there are no apartments and no two-family houses. All of the headache and heartache will be experienced by the people who live on streets where residents actually have to park on the street. "

Well that would be most streets north of Lake Ave and Clifton Park will have no change
outside of manual labor of carrying it. Meanwhile those south of WSL will have to contend
with parking, and the added time and expense of parking elsewhere. This is an unwarranted
hardship on most of the streets in Lakewood, and on some outright death blow.

When buying a house, is it a plus or minus to put in. "Must be home before 5pm, or you
will have to park at least 1 ward away so that trash is collected. Don't worry, only one
day a week." Yeah Birdtown property values just fell farther. Every street south of, well
Clifton, including Clifton lost 10% value. Hey don't worry you are in a walkable city, it is
just not a resident friendly city.

What is even more troubling is the thought process, and I use that term very loosely on
ant-residential laws like closing parks early, garage sales, joining big box chains even in
court against residential neighborhoods. At what point does an elected official decide they
hate and do not trust or Lakewood residents?

This city has truly lost it way.

.

[Grace O'Malley]

WHY would we put bins IN the street? Makes no sense at all. It will create a terrible mess and I'm sure there will be unintended consequences like bins getting knocked over and vehicles hitting them in the dark.


does anybody really THINK about these proposals?

[Scott Meeson]

_____________LKWD?_____________

http://www.slideshare.net/SDeas/lean-six-sigma-for-municipal-government

[Dave Mechenbier]

from making every Lakewoodite spend up to $1,000 a year on their own effort
.

I'd like to test Jim's "value test". Heck, if I could get 100 residents to pay me $1,000/ year I'd quit my day job. I could even offer a 10% discount. I might need another 40 or so to cover federal and state income taxes and the self employment taxes but it sounds possible. Doesn't it?

I have no problem with the automated trash pick-up, but this recycling solution sounds absurd.

[Jim O'Bryan]

from making every Lakewoodite spend up to $1,000 a year on their own effort
.

I'd like to test Jim's "value test". Heck, if I could get 100 residents to pay me $1,000/ year I'd quit my day job. I could even offer a 10% discount. I might need another 40 or so to cover federal and state income taxes and the self employment taxes but it sounds possible. Doesn't it?

I have no problem with the automated trash pick-up, but this recycling solution sounds absurd.

Dave

I am not sure who would pay you that much up front, but I bet if you went around and said, "I will make sure your
trash can is out, and back each trash day for $5 you would get some takers, and in areas with longer walks, I'll
bet you could get $10, which gets you to your price point. Add in keeping it clean and put away, and you might
get $15 a week.

While the automatic trash pick up works, and the driver loves it. Has it added to the city? Does the city look better?
Does the city function better? Did it ever really pay for itself? (Projection was 5 year minimum, and only because
of retirements), does it add to property values or detract? Does it make us different, or even the playing field? Did
it do a single thing that was promised when implemented?

As pointed out in other discussions, Dr. Tom Bier of CSU's Levin College has pointed out many times. A City Hall
and the fame work of a city exists to provide services to the residents and businesses. Legal, safety, maintenance,
planning, and others like water, sewers, etc.. When those services erode, disappear or change, it is either a plus
or a minus on the city overall, and the value of that city to the residents and businesses.

If the city needs to raise taxes to keep services up, then they need to make a good argument and ask for more
money, or cut back on the services. Either move is a raise in taxes. For we are either getting less for the same
amount, or we are paying more for the same thing. There is no difference. So in effect our taxes have been going
up and up and up in small pieces for the last two administrations. This is an easy way to get around asking for
more money, but it also lowers the value of the city overall.

So while we are all at peace with the automated trash collection, I would love to see hard numbers on the payoff.
As I would love to see hard numbers on the tremendous savings of this ridiculous you piece of social engineering
coming off the desk of one of the most anti-resident councilman of all time. I mean you really have to hate people
to go out of your way to close parks early, wanting to turn vibrant churches into micro-breweries, and now make
neighbor fight neighbor for parking spots that were plentiful until the lad playing dr. social engineer makes us place
trash cans before people, and their convenience.

The entire city of Lakewood is upset about this mindless plan, and we are starting to wonder if this city will ever
pass laws that make life in Lakewood better for residents. I believe the last time that happened was letting the
good residents of Lakewood walk with their pets in 1 Lakewood park. Whoooopeeeee! Meanwhile the city has
taken our tax dollars and dumped them into various plans to make Lakewood more sustainable and our business
areas more vibrant. To date Lakewood score is not very good. 3 - Dollar Stores, one value world, some big box
chains that do not really fit in, and the ability of businesses to do damn near anything they want, and if residents
complain the city will join with the business in court to keep the residents down.

I have to say Lakewood has really drifted from the bedroom community that was perfect for raising a family,
getting your kids educated and protected, enjoying the 21.7 acres of city parks, and a general trust and love
between the residents and city hall.

FWIW


.

[Peter Grossetti]

hey, I know ... let's bring this discussion here:

NOTICE OF MEETING – Public Works
PLEASE POST

There will be a Public Works Committee meeting Monday June 24, 2013 at 5:00 PM in the Jury Room of Lakewood City Hall, 12650 Detroit Avenue.

The agenda is as follows:

1. Continuation of discussion with Public Works Department regarding automated recycling

2. Proposed Ordinance 16-13 – Amending 905.07 Animals, and Section 905.98, Authority of the Director of Public Works

(Placed on first reading 6/3/13; referred to PW and discussed on 6/10; 2nd reading 6/17/13)

I'll bet anyone breakfast at The Coffee Pot (12415 Madison Ave, Lakewood, OH) that I'm the only one there.

[Betsy Voinovich]

Honest to God, they can keep their stinking can. I will take the stuff to the dump myself. With all due respect, this is a really bad idea. Really.

Was it unanimous?

Paul-- Your post made me laugh it was so straight to the point and effective. I need to learn from your technique. You have asked the at least 40 thousand dollar question: Who voted for this thing?

I would add, Did any Council member take the time to find out if (any of) his or her constituents support this idea?

Do our Council members (some of them) know they are supposed to represent us? That means if we don't want this, they shouldn't do it. How are we, the public, equipped to make these kinds of decisions? Information would have to be shared with us beforehand. That's part of the deal.

Did any Council member take any steps whatsoever to find out what the residents (the voters) of Lakewood think about this?

Here is where the fact that this is an election year comes in handy.

We can find out who voted for what. Some of our Council members are running for office. Some new people are running against them and can be asked what they would have done in similar circumstances.

Why does it seem like our local representative government (some of them) are so often at flat-out war with the people they swore to represent?

Same thing with closing the parks early. Did anyone ask us? What do they think the word "represent" means?

I'm hoping Chris Bindel comes on to let us know who voted for what.

Paul, thanks for cutting to the chase.


Betsy Voinovich

[Betsy Voinovich]

hey, I know ... let's bring this discussion here:

NOTICE OF MEETING – Public Works
PLEASE POST

There will be a Public Works Committee meeting Monday June 24, 2013 at 5:00 PM in the Jury Room of Lakewood City Hall, 12650 Detroit Avenue.

The agenda is as follows:

1. Continuation of discussion with Public Works Department regarding automated recycling

2. Proposed Ordinance 16-13 – Amending 905.07 Animals, and Section 905.98, Authority of the Director of Public Works

(Placed on first reading 6/3/13; referred to PW and discussed on 6/10; 2nd reading 6/17/13)

I'll bet anyone breakfast at The Coffee Pot (12415 Madison Ave, Lakewood, OH) that I'm the only one there.

Hi Peter--

I'm glad to hear that you will be at that meeting. I'm assuming that there is time allowed for communication from citizens. I don't see why anyone else has to go if you're going to be there, as long as you bring this topic to the table, and report back on it.

Unless you are just saying that a bunch of dismayed residents who want to know "What were you thinking???" would have an effect. Even though we might all be saying the same thing. Actually I think you're right. We should probably all head over there at the amazingly convenient time of 5pm on Monday. If we showed up in numbers we would be taken more seriously.

I don't see that it is a citizen's responsibility to show up at Council committee meetings and babysit to make sure they aren't going to hurt us without telling us. Do we have to go to every discussion they have to make sure we aren't suddenly having legislation thrown at us that limits even more of our freedoms? Do we have to show up to protect ourselves?

When you're there can you bring up the idea of Council reporting out to the community regarding what they are thinking, and actively soliciting feedback before they move forward? Not on everything, but certainly on something like this that will have a large impact on many people's lives, week-in and week-out, and will be absolutely terrible in the wintertime. Something that will actively make life more difficult for many residents.

The other thing that I have done, sometimes successfully, is to write to my councilpeople, and my mayor and and express my opinion, and ask for clarification, or even that they consider something else and change their minds. Their addresses, email, and phone numbers are all available online. You have to be able to reach them. They represent you.

It is not a law or even a rule that you have to show up at their meetings to deserve representation. Newly elected council members don't tell you that when they are sworn in to represent you. They don't say, "We'll represent you if you come to our committee meetings to find out what we are doing." They swear to represent you, the people of their wards, and At Large, period. You might think promising to do this would include finding out what citizens' needs are or are not. (I don't need a recycling bin in the street.)

Anyway, thanks Peter. I know that I will not be able to be there on Monday at 5pm. I'm really glad you're going.

Betsy Voinovich

[Peter Grossetti]

Betsy Voinovich wrote:
"I don't see why anyone else has to go ..."

Precisely what many elected officials want to hear from constituents.


Betsy Voinovich wrote:
"I don't see that it is a citizen's responsibility to show up at Council committee meetings ..."

Again, exactly what some elected officials love to hear from The Collective We.

Betsy Voinovich wrote:
"The other thing that I have done, sometimes successfully, is to write to my councilpeople, and my mayor and and express my opinion, and ask for clarification, or even that they consider something else and change their minds. Their addresses, email, and phone numbers are all available online. You have to be able to reach them. They represent you."

Ah, dear friend, you're getting to get the hang of this participatory form of government.


I've always been moved by Arlo Guthrie's epic music monologue "Alice's Restaurant Massacaree" -- not because it's a satirical account of a real-life incident from my hometown -- but rather for the inspirational passage toward the very end of the song:

And the only reason I'm singing you this song now is cause you may know
somebody in a similar situation, or you may be in a similar situation,
and if your in a situation like that there's only one thing you can do
and that's walk into the shrink wherever you are, just walk in say
"Shrink, You can get anything you want, at Alice's Restaurant."
And walk out. You know, if one person, just one person does it
they may think he's really sick and they won't take him. And if two people,
two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and
they won't take either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine,
three people walking in singing a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out.
They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine
fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking in singing a bar of
Alice's Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may thinks it's
a movement. And that's what it is; the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre
Movement, and all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it come's
around on the guitar.

Metaphorically speaking, it comes around on guitar here in Lakewood (and every other Whoville in this land) more often than you think. We need more than the one sicko, the two harmonizing faggots, the three-person organization. Join the Movement. I've said it here on this forum more than once: "it's better than any TV Reality Show on the air."

[Betsy Voinovich]

Betsy Voinovich wrote:
"I don't see why anyone else has to go ..."

Precisely what many elected officials want to hear from constituents.


Betsy Voinovich wrote:
"I don't see that it is a citizen's responsibility to show up at Council committee meetings ..."

Again, exactly what some elected officials love to hear from The Collective We.

Betsy Voinovich wrote:
"The other thing that I have done, sometimes successfully, is to write to my councilpeople, and my mayor and and express my opinion, and ask for clarification, or even that they consider something else and change their minds. Their addresses, email, and phone numbers are all available online. You have to be able to reach them. They represent you."

Ah, dear friend, you're getting to get the hang of this participatory form of government.


I've always been moved by Arlo Guthrie's epic music monologue "Alice's Restaurant Massacaree" -- not because it's a satirical account of a real-life incident from my hometown -- but rather for the inspirational passage toward the very end of the song:

And the only reason I'm singing you this song now is cause you may know
somebody in a similar situation, or you may be in a similar situation,
and if your in a situation like that there's only one thing you can do
and that's walk into the shrink wherever you are, just walk in say
"Shrink, You can get anything you want, at Alice's Restaurant."
And walk out. You know, if one person, just one person does it
they may think he's really sick and they won't take him. And if two people,
two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and
they won't take either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine,
three people walking in singing a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out.
They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine
fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking in singing a bar of
Alice's Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may thinks it's
a movement. And that's what it is; the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre
Movement, and all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it come's
around on the guitar.

Metaphorically speaking, it comes around on guitar here in Lakewood (and every other Whoville in this land) more often than you think. We need more than the one sicko, the two harmonizing faggots, the three-person organization. Join the Movement. I've said it here on this forum more than once: "it's better than any TV Reality Show on the air."

Hey Peter--

My point here is that when you elect people, you are not signing on to babysit their every move.

Your point here is that if the issue at hand is something that is important to you, one of the things you can do is attend these meetings and that if the governing body has no expectation of their meetings being attended by members of the public, they are likely to not be as accountable. My point was also that if one person is attending, that is enough to share it with the community, and in fact, is one of the reasons we have the Observer project. We can share with each other without any official titles. You don't have to be the City Reporter to let others know what happened at the meeting.

I wasn't advocating that one person carry the torch at all. Clearly there is power in numbers and community. I am saying that the whole community should not be required to attend every meeting, when even one person attending, can use that torch to light many, by sharing their experience.

And I guess I should say regarding "participatory government" that attending committee meetings may not be enough. Ask anyone who attended every School Board meeting during Phase 3 how far it got them to attend every meeting, even asking straight out for reasons why the Board made the decisions they made. It had no effect on the Board's decision at that time. One Board member actually said the Board was not required by law to explain why they were doing what they were doing.

So, petitioning your elected officials directly could also be required for participatory government, whether by formal emails, or by an actual formal petition that many sign.

I think it's great if people attend meetings, being present there means that you see and hear about what your elected officials are doing, and also it is a window into the process of HOW things are done, which is valuable to know. From there if you don't share it with the community, how much effect does that have on the process?

As I said, fortunately you are going to this meeting, will bring your concerns to the meeting, and will let folks know what happened. And maybe more people will join you to show the Council that this particular issue is very important to them-- as I said in my post: "If we showed up in numbers we would be taken more seriously."

While I don't think that a whole bunch of us showing up at every committee meeting should be required for our government to function with transparency and accountability, I think it is a great idea to go to the meetings where discussions are being had about issues that are important to you.

And from there, let your neighbors know. And if you didn't have a chance to speak, email your Council members or call them on the phone. And if you email or phone, share what the response was on the Deck, so you can represent everyone.

So once again, this is tonight! 5 pm.

NOTICE OF MEETING – Public Works


There will be a Public Works Committee meeting Monday June 24, 2013 at 5:00 PM in the Jury Room of Lakewood City Hall, 12650 Detroit Avenue.

The first item on the agenda is:

1. Continuation of discussion with Public Works Department regarding automated recycling

Betsy Voinovich

ps. Peter, can you find out if both bins are supposed to be put out the night before trash day? And our both bins supposed to be in the street? Thanks.

[Matthew Lee]

I know! I know! Here's a novel idea:

How about having meetings NOT at 5 PM but maybe a bit later so that those of us who work for a living could actually attend it? How am I supposed to voice my concern when I (a) find out about it less than a week before it starts and (b) occurs at a time that is so early that many people cannot attend?

Sigh. Thanks, Lakewood!