The Observation Deck

Shelley Hurd wrote:Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee..........................

You have done a yeomans work on this issue.

There are no guarantee's in life.

If the Mayor were able to guarantee all of your requested guarantees he would be more soothsayer than mayor.

From what I have been able to divine from the entrails of this discussion I don't have a clue as to what would be the right decison. But that's no reason not to venture an opinion.

If the system costs $2.5 million and will save $600,000 the pay back period is 4 years. That seems reasonable.

However, amortized over 10 years at just a 4% interest rate would mean annual payments of $300,000. Is the estimated $600,000 in savings before or after the $300,000 in loan amortization? Have they netted the current maintenance and replacement costs?

About 35% of the trash is now carried to the street because of recylcing. Taking an extra can to the curb hardly seems like a big imposition.

Talk about environmental benefits are just smoke and mirrors. If you say adopt this dumb idea because it's "green" otherwise sensible people fall all over themselves to support the dumb idea because they have been told it's good for the environment.

Some of the opposition seems to come from a fear that the service might be out sourced. That opposition is not an economic position but a political and moral position, however, there is no room for politics or morality in City government.

Other cities have implemented the automated system and have seen big savings. As part of an overall effort to increase efficiency, decrease workers comp claims, maintain a healthy working environment and lower the total cost of trash collections automation seems a good idea.

In other cities Automation, with much tweaking "works". But Lakewood’s street configuration and abundance of on street parking, and close proximity of houses and driveways....... Lakewood is NOT like other cites.

Cleveland has "some" automated pick up right? Why haven’t they gone ALL AUTOMATED?

This isn’t necessary, is not based on sound facts, will not have a discernable impact on our funds and takes away a valued service from residents. Enough is enough.

In Lakewood no. No this is not economically a sound investment.

And NO. No the Mayor and Council should not be Gambling with our tax dollars in uncertain economic times. I sure do not in my own life. I would not allow a child to, nor will I sit quietly by and let my elected representatives.

America has allowed politicians play loose and fast with our tax dollars for too long. And look where our country is. Silently going along with elected officials, not holding them accountable for their actions has given us an epidemic of both bankruptcies and foreclosures, bail outs, and trillions of tax dollars being handed over to the same irresponsible “leadersâ€

Shelley Hurd wrote:The Mayor and Council should put something of there’s on the line to lose along with the rest of use.

They do that everytime they make a decision or cast a vote.

I recycle so I bring bags of newspapers and a bag of cans and bottles to the curb every week. I don't see one more trip to the curb as that much of a burden.

If this system saves $600,000 per year then it should be implemented.

Bill,.. (and all you lurkers)

Almost without exception every city that has spewed the propaganda to their residents that Automated refuse collection would saving money, improve cleanliness of the community….. Have all explored or actually gone to privatized collection with in a year of implementing the service.

With the privatization ( and even in the cases where privatization did not occur )came residents being billed for service, increase in cost over city ran refuse collection, reduction in service, most of these residents now must pay for throwing out bulk items, have to “holdâ€

Ah yes, and someone just contacted me with the over looked issue of doubles and triples in Lakewood. The folks living in doubles will undeniably have issues amount each other. Picture the civil discourse and irate tenants who notice that their fellow tenant from another unit put their extra trash in their bin. I can see where this issue alone will cause arguments and fights in some parts of Lakewood that will need to involve the police After one or two (city caused) arguments, those people will undoubtedly resort to hording garbage behind their houses or in their yards. Ummm… then in come the rats…Weeee… and the unsightly nastiness …. And varmints of every possible definition ….maggots …Oh ya, did I mention the rats.

Or is the “planâ€

[quote="Shelley Hurd"]Ah yes, and someone just contacted me with the over looked issue of doubles and triples in Lakewood. The folks living in doubles will undeniably have issues amount each other. Picture the civil discourse and irate tenants who notice that their fellow tenant from another unit put their extra trash in their bin. I can see where this issue alone will cause arguments and fights in some parts of Lakewood that will need to involve the police After one or two (city caused) arguments, those people will undoubtedly resort to hording garbage behind their houses or in their yards. Ummm… then in come the rats…Weeee… and the unsightly nastiness …. And varmints of every possible definition ….maggots …Oh ya, did I mention the rats.

Or is the “planâ€

Shelley - I admire your enthusiasm for the subjects recently discussed. You presented a lot of numbers over the last few days and I’m having a hard time finding where you got some of them (LDF and refuse worker salaries come to mind as well as the 3 million variance in Fire budget to actual in 2007).

There have been a lot of comments about discontinuing backyard pickup and automating refuse collection. My thoughts being these are two separate decisions to be made. Each has been about saving money and privatization is the next logical step. I’d be shocked if this hasn’t been discussed internally amongst the Mayor and administration.

Yes, some cities have started charging extra for trash collection. The Pay As You Throw (PAYT) was one suggested by the AoS in the recent performance audit. I see this as a tax increase without vote of its citizens. Most local governments need its citizens to vote a tax increase. However, a local government can impose all kinds of fees on the services it provides without the vote of citizens.

I’ve only been a resident for 15 years. I rented for 5 and have owned a house for 10. When we moved into our house, the previous resident left a large pile of crap in the back yard. Some was bagged but most of it looked like they just threw it into a pile. They said not to worry as Lakewood has backyard trash pickup. I waited for three weeks for it to be removed. I ended up hauling the crap to the curb myself. So much for backyard pickup I thought.

Now, we have a family of four. Each week I carry 3-4 blue bags as well as cardboard and paper to the curb. We manage to fill one regular size trash can every two weeks. I wouldn’t mind dragging one can to the curb every other week. Backyard pickup does not even enter the equation of why I want to live here. If the City saves mega bucks per year by going curbside, then let’s do it.

I agree with you on the automation part. I haven’t seen an automated truck that can do what we need it to do, as it relates to our environment (cars parked on the street and narrow streets and narrow drives and the occasional 2 feet of snow), and be run by a single person (the driver) without exiting the truck. It should have a 20 foot arm that’s capable of going around/over cars or other obstacles on both sides of the street. It’s been said that a 3 man crew with a conventional truck can blow through a street much faster than a 2-3 man crew with an automated truck (the one demo’d recently). The whole purpose of automation is doing the same job quicker and with less human intervention. I can’t see that happening with any of the automated trucks I’ve seen, even the DuraPack Python with a 9ft arm.

As I stated in an earlier post, there are companies who offer cities the use of an automated vehicle for pilot purposes at no cost. If it hasn’t done so already, the City should be looking into a pilot program with different style vehicles/arms as a proof of concept. Proof that it will work in 80-90% of Lakewood.

Charlie,

Shelley - I admire your enthusiasm for the subjects recently discussed. You presented a lot of numbers over the last few days and I’m having a hard time finding where you got some of them (LDF and refuse worker salaries come to mind as well as the 3 million variance in Fire budget to actual in 2007).

Look at the Structural Balance report for 2007, page 182 “2007 Adopted Budget- 7,129,761
Auditor of State Performance Audit, November 25, 2008 division of fire, page 6-3 - Table 6-1: Expenditures by Function- Lakewood 2007 - 10,367,982
Now if we subtract one from the other we get over a 3 million dollar over budget.

Are we really going to go down the overtime issue road again? I will not have further discussion on that which goes beyond what I have already posted until I have a chance to request, receive and look over actual overtime/sick time information from the city.

As for the refuse department.
Structural Balance report November 15, 2008 page 188 General Fund- Department of Public Works Division of Refuse and Recycling- 2007 final Budget 4,622,045 - 2007 Actual 4,517,623
Or a little over 100,000 below budget

And just to give you fellows your due

Kudos for trying to blow smoke on the issue at hand.

You guys are draining me, but I do not walk away quite so easily. I don’t spook easily, I don’t quite easily. So keep firing away and skating round the issue. It only makes me more driven and more sure this Cities residents are in desperate need of an advocate.

You have become quite the advocate and I’m not trying to blow smoke at the issue. But you need to be looking at the right numbers. The fire and EMS expenditures include funds 101, 260 and pension. The 7,129,761 is only fund 101. The 10 million in the AoS report includes all 3 funds. Add fund 260 and fire pension fund to the 7 million and there is no 3 million variance.

Charlie Page wrote:You have become quite the advocate and I’m not trying to blow smoke at the issue. But you need to be looking at the right numbers. The fire and EMS expenditures include funds 101, 260 and pension. The 7,129,761 is only fund 101. The 10 million in the AoS report includes all 3 funds. Add fund 260 and fire pension fund to the 7 million and there is no 3 million variance.

Thank you and I will check that out

[quote="Shelley Hurd"][quote="Shelley Hurd"]Ah yes, and someone just contacted me with the over looked issue of doubles and triples in Lakewood. The folks living in doubles will undeniably have issues amoung each other. Picture the civil discourse and irate tenants who notice that their fellow tenant from another unit put their extra trash in their bin. I can see where this issue alone will cause arguments and fights in some parts of Lakewood that will need to involve the police After one or two (city caused) arguments, those people will undoubtedly resort to hording garbage behind their houses or in their yards. Ummm… then in come the rats…Weeee… and the unsightly nastiness …. And varmints of every possible definition ….maggots …Oh ya, did I mention the rats.

Or is the “planâ€

There are other aspects to this that have not yet been discussed.

For example...

There are many diabetics and those with medical situations in the city having "sharps" containers to be disposed of. When left in the back yards, these containers are quietly picked up and disposed of in an appropriate manner by the collectors. You certainly don't want "sharps" containers sitting out front for passing school children to examine.

And it would not be realistic for the sick to deliver these personally to Berea Road, so I suppose there will be yet ANOTHER vehicle required to pick this waste up...

Gary Rice wrote:There are other aspects to this that have not yet been discussed.

For example...

There are many diabetics and those with medical situations in the city having "sharps" containers to be disposed of. When left in the back yards, these containers are quietly picked up and disposed of in an appropriate manner by the collectors. You certainly don't want "sharps" containers sitting out front for passing school children to examine.

And it would not be realistic for the sick to deliver these personally to Berea Road, so I suppose there will be yet ANOTHER vehicle required to pick this waste up...

My point again.

We will not be able to eliminate all the Cushmans and and all the current packer trucks.

Yes worker comp claims maybe reduced ( the rfuse department had I belive I read 12 in all of last yr)

But the fuel usage, maintance costs, trips to the dump... will all INCREASE. So, little if any savings would be noticed by going automated.

Again, switching our fleet to natural gas however would have a marked impact on both the budget and would really be "Green"

[quote="Shelley Hurd"]Tonight Council will vote on the Budget.

Knowing that the Mayor and some Council members lurk about this site I will make yet another plea that reason and diligences are used in the decisions they make tonight.


Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that automation service will work smoothly in Lakewood.
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that Automation will not over complicate our lives
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that the city will become noticeably cleaner
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that they will not attempt to outsource the refuse collections at least until the 5-10 years pass that they state it will take to show a noticeable return on our investment
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that they will not use the refuse department as an excuse in a year or two to increase taxes
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that the full range of services we now receive will continue
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that no refuse fees will be assessed for bulk item disposal
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that parking fines will not be imposed for parking too close to a can
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that they will not be charged for lost, stolen or damaged cans
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that restitution for all damage to residents vehicles caused by the automated trucks will be made promptly and without complication
Lakewood residents deserve a Guarantee from the Mayor and Council that this “Greenâ€