The Observation Deck

Sorry, Joe, but you're very very wrong.

What you call "entrenchment" is what I call "involvement". People who are involved in the city, whether through city boards, community organizations, etc. are naturally more likely to know incumbents and therefore be endorsed by them when they decide to run. Not coincidentally, these types of active folks are more likely to have their fingers on the pulse of the people.

Besides, in many cases, every candidate in a given race is preferred by someone at city hall. For example, in ward 1 last year Demro backed Salo, Fitzgerald was with Butler and Dunn was with Ashley. If Salo had won, you would be happy. But he didn't, so you are complaining.

Sounds like a pretty good idea to me....people who are already involved with the community should be elected. Butler's work with the animal shelter, for example, helped him.

Also, I think you're very wrong about door-to-door campaigning. Those who campaign door-to-door beat those who simply cut a check and send mailings. For example, Demro beat Brennan in 2003 in a democratic ward by going door-to-door. Brennan also lost to Nicki Antonio in the 2005 at large, in large part because she did more doo-to-door than he did.

Sounds to me like you just don't like the people being elected. Therefore, you cry "no fair! they have the advantages!" And of course you dredge up the classic "liberal media bias" routine.

Hey, I'm an Ohio Democrat, so to some extent I can relate to your position. Losing stinks, but thats the way it is. Lakewood tends to be liberal, Ohio tends conservative. I would strongly argue that entrenchment is a far bigger problem among the Republicans in Columbus and Washington. Unlike in Lakewood, they can gerrymander their districts and buy power through TV ads.

Mike,

Tell me, for example, why it took Councilman Demro three times to win against people with less involvement than himself. He worked for the schools, he was involved with numerous groups and organizations. Mr. Salo, who you brought up has very much the same type of political credentials. He is president of a Kiwanis organization in town and does work with children inside and outside of the school system.

You make it sound as if the losers had no community involvement, when nothing could be further from the truth.
You completely skip over the point about non-partisan elections, where liberal candidates always say they are the democrat anyways and the newspapers anoint them.

I recall the fury that people made when Councilman Demro wanted a gay pride flag taken down. I don't recall these same people ever voting Mr. Farina into office. Mr Farina had a resume a mile long about community groups he was involved with. He had all the right qualities to be a leader of this community with the exception of one: he had an "R" next to his name. If you honestly think activism is the way to office, he would have gotten in on his first try.

It is unfortunate (but not surprising) that you along with most Lakewood voters think animals are more important than our city's kids. But it brings me back to my original point; had their not been a blind allegiance, something like this wouldn't have happened.

Joe

Joe-

Out of 41,764 records – 9,794 declared D, 3,398 declared R, & 28,572 are listed as no party according to recent BOE records. One reason why so many are listed as no party is because the last primary was non-partisan - so if the BOE records were really good, then all Lakewood voters should have been listed as no party. These records are riddled with errors, but they are the best we can get.

Sometimes, even in non-partisan elections, people have idealogical differences which may be determined along party lines.

As Mike Deneen mentioned, many people know Nickie Antonio over other candidates because of her years of civic service. One barrier she had to overcome was her employment with the city during mayor Cain's terms.

I don't know if you went to the League of Women Voters meetings, but after Antonio answered questions, many other candidates basically responded "what she said." Antonio is a very knowledgable person in local and regional matters. (No surprise here, but we backed Antonio.)

I would also be very careful about making judgements about campaign literature because some literature does as much to convince people they don't want to elect that candidate as it does to sway them to their side. I actually read that stuff and am usually amazed by just how awful it is.

Was Tom George annointed by city hall when he was the first city council member to run and win a mayoral seat? If he was annointed by city hall, it wasn't by the sitting mayor and I would assume there were some reasons why people at city hall determined they would support one candidate over another. It wasn't partisan politics as both Cain & George are Dems.

Two candidates that the mayor supported in the council race did not win and one of them didn't survive the primary.

Salo ran a very close race in ward 1. He lost by a few hundred votes. From wht I have heard, there were a couple of factors in his loss and the most commonly cited anecdotal reason was that he ran the costliest council campaign in Lakewood's history. Spending that much money made those I heard from very uncomfortable.

Joe, you write, "A few of the people's places that were replaced in the last election were because they either a) didn't want to run again or b) wanted to run for higher office. I'm pretty sure, in both cases, as soon as they made that decision the first thing they did was put their house up for sale and move out of the city." I'd love to know to whom you refer.

The last time I looked, former council members Dunn, Brian Corrigan & Patrick Corrigan are still living in Lakewood.

As Mike mentioned, the majority of council is new. Demro, Madigan, Antonio and Butler are all first termers.

Only Seelie, Dever and Fitzgerald are not new.

If I remember correctly, Fitgerald was initially appointed to his seat replacing Bryan Flannery while Dever replaced Michael Skindell. (I may have that backwards)

Denis Dunn ran and won his seat, but decided not to run again. If I recall correctly, Dunn was part of a National Guard unit that had been called up during the election cycle.

Joe, you seem to think that incumbents haven't proven their worth, but let me cite the example of Michael Dever who has extensive knowledge of the infrastructure issues that the city faces. I don't know of any other council member who is so uniquely qualified to help guide the city in that particular area. It was Dever who suggested that council form a new citizens' committee (of highly qualified people) to analyze our street repair schedule and tackle our problems replacing the sewers. There's a glamor job.

Since candidates often report that the number one problem people want to talk about is street repair, wouldn't you concur that an incumbent had been addressing one of the city's problems? Wasn't that a reasonable thing upon which to base a vote?

There are many variables in campaigns and relying primarily on power politics as an explanation of success or failure ignores many other factors.

----

Demro isn't the only Lakewood politician to run unsuccessfully before gaining an office. In recent memory, Bryan Flannery and Tom George also fit this scenario. And if no Republican can be elected, then why did Pam Smith have three terms on council? There's more to it than D's & R's.

First of all, I like most Lakewood voters care a lot about kids. I think all of us here can agree that Lakewood's support for schools is very strong. Results of the bond issue election would bear that out.

I point to Butler's work with the shelter as an example of his activity in the community. If Salo is active in community stuff too, then good for him.
The main thing I remember about Salo's campaign is that he "accused" Butler of being a Republican, which is a pretty weird accusation coming from a Republican.

Non-partisan elections, by the way, do not mean that candidates cannot or should not declare their party affiliation. It is smart for candidates that are democrats to let voters know this. Whether you like it or not, most Lakewood voters feel that the democratic party is closer to their beliefs than republicans. I agree with them, you don't. That's politics.

Likewise, most Ohio voters feel the same way about the GOP. You agree with them, I don't. That's politics. But it doens't really do any good for any of my fellow dems to run around accusing Ken Blackwell of "fixing" the statewide election, or to badmouth downstate Ohio voters as a bunch of rubes and hicks. Such claims only come off as sour grapes, as does your argument about Lakewood voters.

As for Mr. Demro, it is no surprise that he did not win the first time out. But then again, democrats like Brennan haven't won in their first or second tries, either. However, Demro's election did provide evidence that there is hope for minority parties. Who knows, maybe there will even be an Ohio Democrat elected this year.

Keep the faith, Joe!

Mr. O.

The one problem with the "City of Homes" slogan is that it's incomplete. The full slogan always should have been "City of Homes For People Who Work in Cleveland". You can't argue that for much of its history, Lakewood has depended on Cleveland companies to supply bodies for its bedrooms. Obviously, Lakewood can no longer do that. One walk down Euclid Avenue should convince you of that.
So if there is no business in Lakewood and less and less in Cleveland, where exactly are those 25,000 or so adults working? That question has to be rationally answered.

Mr. Warren.

Thank you for the encouraging comments.
As to my definition of "eclectic," I can only answer with my experience in another city. Several years ago, I visited Vancouver. I stayed in the City Hall area, just across the bridge from the glitzy high-rises of downtown we see in the travel brochures.
This neighborhood blew me away. New, west-coast style condos were next door to "pre-1929" houses. A hospital had put up several professional buildings, but other doctors had located into older Victorians. A small, three-story urban "mini-mall" with a great grocery store and other decent shopping for locals, had sprouted in the middle. A main drag, quite similar to Detroit Ave had a mix of ethnic restaurants, watering holes, small retail, along with STOREFRONT versions of Best Buy and Office Depot.
It broke every rule of urban planning. It was an architecture critics' worst nightmare. But I LOVED it, and from what I could gather, so did the residents who lived there.

Lakewood can't hope to emulate Vancouver, but that's not what I'm saying. Much as I respect what Mr. O is doing and genuinely admire his commitment to the city, I get twitchy when I hear the phrase "building the Lakewood Brand." I always liked Lakewood because it didn't HAVE a brand. Does that make any sense?

The answer about where Lakewood residents work not only would result from a rational analysis, but would result only from knowing what the material facts are about where people work.

Lakewood, next to Cleveland Heights, sends more people to work 'out of town' than any other suburb in the MSA, reported by the PD last July.

But, 'out of town' means to workplaces in other suburbs too.

***

Lakewood, as Ken implies, is configured to capture new residents for a lot of good reasons. Still, the one thing you could say about new residents and potential new residents is that they are unlikely to be identified with Lakewood. (In fact, an inquiry about what residents are identified with Lakewood and what residents are not is an important bit of research.) My informed guess is that Lakewood, as a place to live, largely constitutes an economic proposition offering congenial household-economic models.

Those models fit into developmental cycles having to do with persons moving to Lakewood not to identify with Lakewood but, rather, to have a stable platform with which to go about their work and home life.

To my way of looking at it, the number one factor is the high percentage of rentals. (It would be interesting to know what the longitudinal churn is through the rentals.) I'd be very surprised to learn that the intergenerational identification with Lakewood has much to do with successive generations camping out in doubles. Anecdotal evidence is besides the point.

What's the mix of new residents in Lakewood defined by persons and families on their way up 'in life,' or on their way down?

Joan Roberts wrote:Mr. O.

The one problem with the "City of Homes" slogan is that it's incomplete. The full slogan always should have been "City of Homes For People Who Work in Cleveland". You can't argue that for much of its history, Lakewood has depended on Cleveland companies to supply bodies for its bedrooms. Obviously, Lakewood can no longer do that. One walk down Euclid Avenue should convince you of that.
So if there is no business in Lakewood and less and less in Cleveland, where exactly are those 25,000 or so adults working? That question has to be rationally answered.
....

Lakewood can't hope to emulate Vancouver, but that's not what I'm saying. Much as I respect what Mr. O is doing and genuinely admire his commitment to the city, I get twitchy when I hear the phrase "building the Lakewood Brand." I always liked Lakewood because it didn't HAVE a brand. Does that make any sense?

Joan


You have actually made my points. So with a dwindling work area not just in Cleveland but in the entire region where does Lakewood even fit in? There are malls failing and closing everywhere for a host of reasons that I only see accelerating in the future. Legacy Village a success comes in 80% under proejction for city taxes! Even at 100% occupancy!!!!

People will always need a place to stay and sleep, how much longer will they need $5.00 coffee, $7.00 slice of cheesecake, or $200 Coach handbags? And even if they need them, the people selling them are making minimum wage, and the owners of these malls stores would be taking the money out of Lakewood.

"The city of homes" is not building the Lakewood Brand. You are, Ken is, the Observer is. The Lakewood Brand we talk about is a vibrant energized city that is not afraid to talk together, work together and live together. It is a brand that comes from amplifying civic intelligence, rejoicing in artistic intelligence, and comfortable in it's own skin.

Merely saying "The City of Homes" would get no one to come, it is as lame as "It's Lakewood's Time." While they are cute slogans, it will bring no one in to live or even work here. However the Library has brought people in, the Observer has brought people in, the low cost store fronts with high residential destiny could bring people in, the knowledge that you can move into a double in Birdtown or luxury condo can bring people in. The Car Show, Art Show, Observer Parade, Car Clubs, Concerts, Entertainment can and has brought people in.

In short, Vancouver built their brand in your mind, and you are now serving their brand of koolaid to us. Would it be so bad if someone there was serving Lakewood Koolaid to the Kanucks?

The brand is not what I decide to push, it is just amplifying the life blood of the city, and finding people that want to be part of it. Does it work ask Rita Ryland, ask The Carinos, ask the 16 people we know that moved out and moved back.

I am not trying to make Jimmyville. i am trying to HELP make Lakewood self sufficient, a place that is an incubator for small businesses to grow, for larger businesses to want to move and live here, and make the city safe, clean and fun for all. If this runs counter to your hopes, then even through the Observer, you can build, work, explain and get out your ideas and hopes.

Is that so bad?

Am I so evil?


.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:[
In short, Vancouver built their brand in your mind, and you are now serving their brand of koolaid to us. Would it be so bad if someone there was serving Lakewood Koolaid to the Kanucks?




.

I guess I should quit trying this newfangled forum stuff, because I'm spending too much time trying to explain "what I meant." I thought I went out of my way to a. couch my Vancouver experience in positive terms for Lakewood and b. point out that there was little connection, other than eclecticism, between the two cities
I don't drink "Kool-Aid" and have no particular thing to push to anyone, Lakewood or elsewhere, nor do I have the means to push it if I did.
Thanks for the chance to express myself. I think I need to brush up on my writing skills. all the best.

DL & Mike;

you can garble the stats all you want; the fact is that that there has for over a decade, be it Mrs. Smith or Mr. Demro, been only one republican on council at any given time. If the voters, (not those registered but the people actually voting, are truly as non partisan as you make them out to be, there would be a balance represented in council.)
If the people you mentioned hadn't made it in this time, some other liberal would have.
It is interesting that both of you failed to address how someone with Farina's credentials and experience and campaign history is ignored by both of you. Since his first run for office here in Lakewood, even before it, there have been many problems unaddressed by whichever "D" gets a seat on council. Go ahead and spin these numbers as much as you wish, but if one looks at say poll results from the last election, had the winner not won, another "D" most of the time would have. Tim Carroll didn't even come in close. There probably isn't a conservative who is crazy enough to throw their hat into the ring, be it for mayor or council.
This hurts the process regardless of which side has nearly an absolute monopoly, something I thought you guys have been opposed to. A Monopoly in politics is not much different than a monopoly in business. We have seen that with problems on both the state and federal level. I just hope it doesn't find its way here.
Who is to say that the west end fiasco wouldn't have even got moving had checks and balances been in place?

Joe----- I thought that DL and Mike were very clear-------- If the voters like you, then you win. If they don't, you lose. Can it be made any more simple than that?

Stan Austin

Joseph Milan wrote:DL & Mike;

you can garble the stats all you want; the fact is that that there has for over a decade, be it Mrs. Smith or Mr. Demro, been only one republican on council at any given time. If the voters, (not those registered but the people actually voting, are truly as non partisan as you make them out to be, there would be a balance represented in council.)

Joe-

I was not trying to say that voters are non-partisan. I was trying to say the opposite. I was attempting to say that even in a year with a non-partisan primary where technically every voter in Lakewood should have been listed as having no party, the numbers were still

9,794 declared D 3,398 declared R

Now, I learned the New Math, but still, it is pretty obvious to me that 9,794 is a bigger number than 3,398. That means that in Lakewood, D's are going to be more likely to win.

Did Farina lose because he was a Republican or a gay Republican? (He's a D now...)

Did Tim Caroll lose simply because he was an R? Could there be no other reason?

I like the idea of checks and balances very much, but I do not see it in government on a local, state or national level.

Joe, you write, "Who is to say that the west end fiasco wouldn't have even got moving had checks and balances been in place?"

Liberals and conservatives alike backed the Shops at West End project, so I don't understand your point.

Joan Roberts wrote:I guess I should quit trying this newfangled forum stuff, because I'm spending too much time trying to explain "what I meant." I thought I went out of my way to a. couch my Vancouver experience in positive terms for Lakewood and b. point out that there was little connection, other than eclecticism, between the two cities
I don't drink "Kool-Aid" and have no particular thing to push to anyone, Lakewood or elsewhere, nor do I have the means to push it if I did.
Thanks for the chance to express myself. I think I need to brush up on my writing skills. all the best.

Joan

I like what you write, and enjoy the discussion. All I was trying to get at was, as Vancouver springs to your mind as an "identity" for eclectic. I hope that someday Lakewood springs forth as an identity other than the city next to Cleveland.

There are millions of things Lakewood will never become, and another million it could become. I am not trying to change or even build an identity. I am merely trying to amplify what we have to offer, as you mentioned in passing Vancouver.

I still maintain that Lakewood's single biggest problem is low self esteem.

You bring a lot to this discussion and this table. I do hope you continue to post and take part.


.

Joe


As a fellow Kiwainian, and one that had the pleasure of speaking to your club. I am just curious, did Ryan carry the entire club? How many members of the Rockport Club live in his ward?

I think Ryan got elected finally because instead of being a representative of the Republican Party he became a representative of the residents in his Ward.


FWIW



.

Joan:

Your thinking and writing are, at least to mind, some of the clearest and telling on the board.

I understand your point about the eclectic array of amenities and buildings in Vancouver.

I realize challenges sometimes issued to extend or clarify a line of thinking can become a drain on your time bank.

You offer sane, sensible control points in critical thought forms on the sometimes "irrational exuberance" of "Koolaid" and building the brand.

I especially find your perception about the low-key appeal of Lakewood an important point to consider.

How does the velocity of sheer dollars moving into and out of a place create a mood, a feeling - on a continuum of migrant/mania and homie/ depression?

These are value added/subtracted dimensions to what Steve Calhoun might call the city's "affectual ecology."

Lakewood is, for me, an appealing mid-point on this continuum of mood.

Mr. O'Bryan's injection of Kool Aid and brand building strategies might perhaps introduce for some an alien strain to the city's low-key appeal, which does have something to do with affordability, mixed economy, and a range of building styles.

That's why we are attempting to know our city and neighbors, so we can work out a sense of community norms and values together.

Your engagement with Mr. O'Bryan, one qualifying and refining our civic intelligence and economic development strategies, is a vital exchange.

Your points about the bookstore were all critical reality checks on civic dreams.

So please, from time to time, make your intelligent contributions, which I find formative to practice, a vital part of this experiment.

Kenneth Warren

Joan:

I have skipped to the bottom of the page and am letting my casserole burn to specifically ask you to NOT refrain from posting on the boards.

Yes, a part of joining the online community is understanding that there can be many misinterpretations along the way; however, there are just as many in any face to face conversation - they just seem more natural as you are used to conversation. Please stick with it and these types of clarifications and bounces back and forth will become more natural.

I don't always agree with you, however, you present a mature, insightful, well thought out position in each of your posts. You challenge me (and dare I assume others) to think carefully about our position, to ensure that it is based on realistic and attainable gaols supported by well grounded facts. YOU have both changed my mind and strengthened my positions in any given day and it always makes me proud to think that we are neighbors in this city.

Now.

That being said...I better go salvage that tuna

Peace,
~Charyn