The Observation Deck

I thought all this junk would end after the election. At times it seems that Observers do so much more peeking and gossiping and bickering over the digital fence than talking.

Not that there's no place for debate. There's just so much unproductive, hurtful sniping.

The thread about needing an indoor recreation facility in Lakewood was generally constructive and informative - the Deck at its best.

This thread is trash.

My assumption from this story is that Mayor George is not at city hall and not in New Orleans at taxpayers expense Right?

Maybe he is taking unused vacation or sick time. I hope so. I do remember 4 years ago when Mayor Cain and her aids wanted us to pay her for her unused personal days.

Cain, aides won't get $17,000 in payouts
Lakewood has refused to honor more than $17,000 in claims that former Mayor Madeline Cain and four top aides filed during their final hours in office. The claims include a request from the aides to be paid for an unused personal day in 2004, even though they all left office Dec. 31. The new administration as ruled those claims to be inappropriate. Cain accuses the new administration of playing politics.

http://www.cleveland.com/newslogs/plain ... 04_01.html

I truly hope that this transition is better than the previous one and the first 100 days go smoothly for the Fitzgerald administration. That is what is best for Lakewood however you felt before the election.

Grace O'Malley wrote:

I got verification from three people before I posted the information.

VERIFICATION?

What you got, obviously, was RUMOUR.

If I were you, I'd write your sources off as unreliable and quit posting scurrilous comments. This is not the first time you've done that. As I recall, you thought you had the big scoop on a "Seeley" nepotism employee.
That was also false.

You remember the story about the boy who cried wolf?

A lesser-known story: The Girl Who Used Caps Lock.

The Observation Deck is a good place to throw rumors out there and figure out whether they're true or not, wouldn't you say?

For example, there is no plan afoot among Council to sell Kaufmann Park, Jim O'Bryan is not running for mayor, and, well, I will not be the new law director. Let's not make this more than what it is. Let's not call something "scurrilous" when it's really not, shall we?

Kevin -

Shame on you.

You never post on here anymore unless it is something nasty. You've done a very good job as a city councilperson, why don't you keep it at that?

Jim O'Bryan wrote:Though it always bothers me and defeats the purpose of the Observer to frame a conversation or statement with "a source who does not want to be unidentified."

The name of the game here is own your words and thoughts. A civic discussion with real people that care enough and back their thoughts enough to use real names.

Jim, I'm not holding my breath for your source on the news that AT&T is placing the Uverse boxes underground in Fairview Park.

Again, this is a good place to sort out rumors. When they're only rumors, it's OK to let them go.

Kevin Butler wrote:

Jim O'Bryan wrote:Though it always bothers me and defeats the purpose of the Observer to frame a conversation or statement with "a source who does not want to be unidentified."

The name of the game here is own your words and thoughts. A civic discussion with real people that care enough and back their thoughts enough to use real names.

Jim, I'm not holding my breath for your source on the news that AT&T is placing the Uverse boxes underground in Fairview Park.

Again, this is a good place to sort out rumors. When they're only rumors, it's OK to let them go.

Kevin

The facts are I did pull a petition to run for mayor, and recieved enough signatures then chose not to run.

It was a call from a city council person from Fairview, not Fairview Park would not let them be installed unless they were underground. How was I to know they would roll over for AT&T? Letting AT&T ghettoize their city with massive installations on public land that takes away value. To be honest I never thought it would happen here either.

In the end I own my words and accept full responsibilty. You know who started the thread/rumor/whatever.



FWIW

Brad Hutchison wrote: This thread is trash.

This City has serious financial problems. Pretending those problems don't exist might make you feel good but it doesn't make them go away.

That may be a fair point, Bill, and I don't mean to belittle your passion for that point, but this thread is doing nothing constructive about it. It was started with a negative tone, which made others react negatively, and it becomes a vicious circle that leads nowhere.

It is certainly not my place, nor my intent, nor my desire to pass judgment on any forum topic. It is just exhausting at times, and frustrating, at the course these threads can take. I have to believe, Bill, that you would admit that this thread has not run the course you intended. The combative nature of most of the postings here has everyone angry at each other, and no one remembers that you were attempting to draw attention to the city's "serious financial problems."

I apologize for calling the thread trash, I certainly did not help the matter. There was a lot of talk during the election about drawing more on the intellectual capital of the city's residents. We (the Observers) can be a force for change, but only though positive, productive, constructive discourse. The more negative we are, the less anyone will care to listen. We are all passionate about Lakewood, and we can better serve Lakewood by sometimes taking a deep breath before pounding out a reactionary post.

In my humble opinion...

Bill Call wrote:

Brad Hutchison wrote: This thread is trash.

This City has serious financial problems. Pretending those problems don't exist might make you feel good but it doesn't make them go away.

Bill


We can all agree with this.

How did we get here?

What do we cut?

How can we do it better or cheaper.

How much do we raise taxes?

If anyone has opinions on this it is you.



.

Brad Hutchison wrote: Bill, that you would admit that this thread has not run the course you intended. The combative nature of most of the postings here has everyone angry at each other, and no one remembers that you were attempting to draw attention to the city's "serious financial problems."

That is a legitimate criticism of many of my posts.

On the other hand how many people would read a post titled:

Formulated Appropriations Ordinances (temporary and permanent) including preliminary estimated revenues and expenditures including, in part, the Lakewood Structural Balance Committee Findings & Recommendations, as authorized by resolution No. 8167-07.

My posts ARE intended to stir people up. Think everything is fine YELL IT OUT LOUD!! Think we have problems? TELL IT LIKE IT IS!

Argue about:

taxes, closing a fire station, raises, pay cuts, more employees, fewer employees, more stores, fewer stores, sell a park, don't sell a park. Decisions are going to be made and the Observer is as good a place as any to discuss the possibilities.

It would have been smart politics and easier economics to face these problems four years ago but they weren't so here we are....

deleted

Rick Uldricks wrote:I should have titled this post differently:

Projected deficit starts talk of levy
http://lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5254

Thanks for reminding me. I intended to respond to your post but I was curious to see how many people would actually take an interest in higher taxes for the schools before I did.

That is a legitimate criticism of many of my posts.

On the other hand how many people would read a post titled:

Formulated Appropriations Ordinances (temporary and permanent) including preliminary estimated revenues and expenditures including, in part, the Lakewood Structural Balance Committee Findings & Recommendations, as authorized by resolution No. 8167-07.

Surely there's a middle ground?

There's no grey in Bill's world, only black and white.