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

[Peter Grossetti]

Committee Chair Juris (Ward 3) had to wait for a quorum in order to open meeting. Councilwoman Madigan (Ward 4) arrived 5:16; Councilman Bullock (Ward 2) absent.

The most telling and accurate quote of the evening came from Councilman Juris: "There will never be enough time to address all the questions." Which, in my opinion is exactly why a governing body charged with addressing multiple complex issues should not be a part-time body who each earns a $7,000 annual stipend. Please don't get me wrong; that doesn't mean that I don't appreciate the time and effort put forth by the seven people We elected. It just means that I think more resources (time, people and money) need to be put toward The People's Work. Is it time for Lakewood to consider a full-time paid council? (I think several members of our current council would truly excel in such a role.)

Sorry, Betsy, comments/questions from public were not taken. (time constraints)

[Betsy Voinovich]

Hi Peter,

What did happen at the meeting? Was there discussion over the fact that some in the community are worried about what amounts to a self-imposed parking ban with placing recycling bins in the street the night before? Was there
any acknowledgment of the fact that some citizens were not fans of this plan?

When Councilman Juris said that about questions, does that mean he didn't address any questions? What did
the discussion amount to? (I completely agree about the lack of time and low wages.)

Thanks.

Betsy Voinovich

[Jim O'Bryan]

Hi Peter,

What did happen at the meeting? Was there discussion over the fact that some in the community are worried about what amounts to a self-imposed parking ban with placing recycling bins in the street the night before? Was there
any acknowledgment of the fact that some citizens were not fans of this plan?

When Councilman Juris said that about questions, does that mean he didn't address any questions? What did
the discussion amount to? (I completely agree about the lack of time and low wages.)

Thanks.

Betsy Voinovich

In a project as complicated and serious as this I would hope that they were open to hear the questions from those
there. I would hope that the head of the committee would realize that there are many other issues percolating in
the details.

If a person parks to close to a trash can are they ticketed?

Who gets ticketed the car, or the person that might have put the trash can to close to the car after the car was parked?

Is there any other way to achieve the same results that would generate even more savings for the city.

Is the savings even real, or is it a red herring again?

I have seen the sharp work this group has done in the past, closing parks without ever walking into them, or talking
with the people that use the parks. Just did it because "they knew nothing good happens in a park after dusk."
Which actually says more about their twisted thoughts than accurately reflecting the truth.

This group committee head has a habit of doing things half assed while shooting from the hip with little or no
basis in fact or reason.

Let's have a good discussion so we can be sure we are not just looking for another way to save pennies while
devaluing our city by millions.

.

[Matthew Lee]

I agree we need a discussion. But how can we have a discussion if the meeting doesn't even allow a discussion? When do we get a chance to be heard?

It was already disappointing that they held the meeting at 5 PM when, basically, nobody could really attend. It was already disappointing that the only way I knew it existed was because Peter graciously posted it (thanks, Peter). But it was really disappointing to hear that even if I knew about it and could attend it, they didn't take any feedback from residents.

This isn't the US Congress. It's Lakewood. We should be able to let our voices be heard and count before making a decision that will affect every one of us. When will they listen to us and perhaps put some common sense into the discussion of what to do with the recycling bins?

[Betsy Voinovich]

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!

Hi Matt--

I object to you sighing and thanking "Lakewood." We are Lakewood. Those guys are our not very responsive
representative government. They need to work for us, we pay them and they are supposed to represent us,
Lakewood.

I agree with everything you said this morning:

Mattthew Lee said:I agree we need a discussion. But how can we have a discussion if the meeting doesn't even allow a discussion? When do we get a chance to be heard?

It was already disappointing that they held the meeting at 5 PM when, basically, nobody could really attend. It was already disappointing that the only way I knew it existed was because Peter graciously posted it (thanks, Peter). But it was really disappointing to hear that even if I knew about it and could attend it, they didn't take any feedback from residents.

This isn't the US Congress. It's Lakewood. We should be able to let our voices be heard and count before making a decision that will affect every one of us. When will they listen to us and perhaps put some common sense into the discussion of what to do with the recycling bins?

I object to Councilman Juris saying "there will never be time to hear all of the opinions..." You are exactly right. This is not US Congress, the paperwork isn't 1000 pages long or even 50. What else is there to do but to assess different approaches and opinions TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE FEELINGS OF THE RESIDENTS? Where does this come in their committee meetings. Who are they serving here? I don't get it.

I'm not sure how the discussion was updated or moved along last night as Peter Grossetti has not yet let us know what the new developments were, except for that pretty offensive quote from Councilman Juris.

Betsy Voinovich

[Matthew Lee]

Betsy, you are correct. Should have said "Thanks, Lakewood city council!". Mea Culpa.

[David Anderson]

Hello, all.

I just wanted to chime in real quick.

I believe I am mostly to blame for the inability to hear questions/comments from the public last night. My few questions quickly turned into discussions that took the majority of the time allocated to this hearing. I am sure Councilmember Juris would have been more than willing to extend the discussion but the Finance Committee was already a few minutes late in starting as it was.

David W. Anderson
Councilmember, Ward 1
216-789-6463

[Peter Grossetti]

Just to be perfectly clear here ... my quoting Councilman Juris (Ward 3) "There will never be enough time to address all the questions" was NOT intended as a slam or poke. In fact, it's actually just the opposite and very insightful. To put the statement in context: Mr. Juris said it at the very end of a Public Works Committee meeting that started 16 minutes late and was scheduled to last 30 minutes ... as a Finance Committee chaired by Councilwoman Madigan (Ward 4) was scheduled for 5:30pm (and Councilwoman Madigan was gracious enough to allow the Public Works meeting to run over into Finance's time ... more than likely because she was the one who was late arriving to the Public Works Committee meeting and caused it to start late in the first place -- but don't quote me on that; just surmising.) ([And again, that is NOT a knock on Ms. Madigan - because can we really expect part time council members who also have full time careers to be able to get to each and every council committee meeting on time? Even Mr. Juris, while waiting for Ms. Madigan to arrive to make a quorum, quipped "Oh, the risks of a 5PM meeting".])

Anyway, my point is: the "process"is wrong. Even a councilman (whether intentional or not) essentially indicated that with two comments: 1.) "There will never be enough time to address all the questions." and 2.) "Oh, the risks of a 5PM meeting."

Discussing complex issues that affect 52,000 people should take more than two or three or four 30-minute meetings. I also am dismayed that these issues (or proposed ordinances) are very very rarely ever referred to more than one council committee. In this instance, I could see Finance Committee having a "look-see" at this issue as there are multiple, far-reaching financial consequences associated with the rolling out and paying for such a conversion.

[Peter Grossetti]

I believe I am mostly to blame for the inability to hear questions/comments from the public last night. My few questions quickly turned into discussions that took the majority of the time allocated to this hearing. I am sure Councilmember Juris would have been more than willing to extend the discussion but the Finance Committee was already a few minutes late in starting as it was.

Councilman Anderson - In my opinion, you have nothing to apologize about. Your questions and the points you raised were 100% on point and legitimate. As were Councilman Nowlin's (At-Large)!

This discussion, at the discretion of Public Works Committee Chair, can continue should he decide that a fifth 30-minute meeting should be had.

The reason there was not time for public comment had nothing to do with Councilman Anderson's line of questioning or the number of questions comment he and Coucilman Nowlin had. The reason is that the existing "process" is flawed.

[Peter Grossetti]

It was already disappointing that the only way I knew it existed was because Peter graciously posted it (thanks, Peter).

Matthew - By law, notice of Council meetings, Council Committee meetings, and (I believe) all or most of the Boards and Commissions must be made public with 48 hours of the meeting date/time. You can always check the Public Notice section of the City website: http://www.onelakewood.com/PublicNotices/Default.aspx

I had been trying to post those notices on a regular basis both here and on the LO FaceBook page https://www.facebook.com/pages/Lakewood-Observer/151628958184731?ref=ts&fref=ts ... but because of full-time job commitments have been falling behind in that effort. I'll try to be more diligent about posting such notices.

[Peter Grossetti]

I'm not sure how the discussion was updated or moved along last night as Peter Grossetti has not yet let us know what the new developments were ...

They way I saw it, there was nothing "new."

The two main topics of discussion were, from what I recall (I think I missed one of the four Public Works Committee meetings where the new automated recycling process was discussed) were rehashes of existing concerns. Specifically:

1.) Councilman Nowlin questioned some of the nuances regarding language describing where and when and how cars could/should park and how bins could/should be placed in street, on apron, on treelawn ... and unneighborly retaliatory actions that are bound to arise. For the first time in my life, I saw Law Director Kevin Butler literally speechless ... essentially not able to render an opinion/suggestion (which is the role the Law Director generally plays at these committee meeting). In my opinion, Kevin (appropriately) balked because I feel he realized that there are unclosed loopholes in the way the parking and bin placement is described and implemented in the proposed new plan.

2.) Councilman Anderson once again (he's been all over this since Day One) sought to probe deeper into the overall cost savings, the return-on-investment timetable, precisely how homes with three and four units were going to be able to fit up to eight bins on a tree lawn, apron, or in the street; as well as ....

.... ah, damn .... oops, times up. Time to adjourn so we can get the Finance Committee in!

It's the process that is broken, folks! We have some pretty intelligent and insightful people on Council. Too bad they just a have two or three 30-minute meetings to hash these things out.

[marklingm]

Councilman Nowlin questioned some of the nuances regarding language describing where and when and how cars could/should park and how bins could/should be placed in street, on apron, on treelawn ... and unneighborly retaliatory actions that are bound to arise. For the first time in my life, I saw Law Director Kevin Butler literally speechless ... essentially not able to render an opinion/suggestion (which is the role the Law Director generally plays at these committee meeting). In my opinion, Kevin (appropriately) balked because I feel he realized that there are unclosed loopholes in the way the parking and bin placement is described and implemented in the proposed new plan.

Peter,

It is good to hear that Councilman Nowlin is asking hard questions.

Why does Law Director Butler attend any City Council meeting if he cannot advise his client - i.e., City Council?

Matt

[marklingm]

It's the process that is broken, folks! We have some pretty intelligent and insightful people on Council. Too bad they just a have two or three 30-minute meetings to hash these things out.

Peter,

I couldn't disagree with you more!

These folks at City Hall are stealing our rights, privileges, and liberties. The last ordinance passed by City Hall that was pro-Citizen simply allowed us to walk our dogs in the park.

Why give City Hall more time to rob Lakewood?

City Hall reminds me of a book that I read to my kids - i.e., "If You Give a Pig a Pancake" by Laura Numeroff, Felicia Bond (Illustrator):





Matt

[Peter Grossetti]

Peter,

I couldn't disagree with you more!
Matt

Yet we remain good friends?!?!? I guess it IS true ... politics DO make strange bedfellows.

Or ... if you combine my view of what's wrong with at City Hall and your view of what's wrong with at City Hall, we are pretty much screwed, yes?

Citizenry to the rescue!

[Will Brown]

I've seen some towns and cities where they handle recyclables by having depositories scattered around, and each household takes its recyclables to the depository. Its not as if we each have so many recyclables that we can't put them in a cart and wheel it a few hundred feet. Perhaps we could dedicate a curb area where we could all stick our bins, so we would only lose one parking place. I'd volunteer the space right in front of Ed Fitzgerald's house.