The Observation Deck

Posted: **Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:08 am**

"The Sustainability Manager will be responsible for creating, implementing, managing, and maintaining various sustainability policies, programs, and projects"...

A little peak at what we will be allowing our (sic) "Sustainability Manager" to endevor into.

Jeff says:
January 12, 2010 at 1:40 pm
Suggestion – In light of the fact that the state legislature has not resolved school funding problems, school districts should approach each other and consolidate human and capital resources. Administrative and clerical functions such as personnel, accounting, purchasing,transportation, psychological services, therapy, testing,and specialized academic programs can be shared among districts. In many cases, only two or three districts would need to share in order to save money. Similar school communities such as Fairview Park/Rocky River, North Olmsted/Olmsted Falls, North Ridgeville/Midview, etc. could even share resources such as auditoriums for performances and meetings. Networking and simplifying communications systems and eliminating paper could expedite the flow of requests and information for purchasing and other functions.

Robert Robinson says:
January 12, 2010 at 10:48 am
Ohio should require the county governments to consolidate into regional governments. Instead of having 88 separate county recorders, auditors, administrators, treasurers, etc. it should be cut down to 22 regional government offices. The reason for 88 was so that people could get to the county seat and back home during the age of transportation by horse. Today people can either contact the county/regional governments by phone internet or drive to the regional government center. This would cut down on the costs of administering government dramatically.

Jim Bradshaw says:
January 12, 2010 at 1:30 pm
Why doesn’t someone start removing all the different layers of government.
Police and fire fighters come to mind first. Do Really need Akron, Barberton, Green, New Franklin, Hudson, Summit County Sheriff, etc. etc. etc. Why can’t one professional police agency for summit county minimize administration and beef up actual feet on the street.
(http://blog.efficientgovnow.org/?p=329)

When big money lobbyists in Washington sway national policies and appropriations , we in Small City USA can do little other then shake our heads in disgust as we have it reported to us on FoxNews or CNN. Our Washington politicians are too far removed from our voices to be heard over the sea swell of lobbyist cash to even be noticed.

When big money lobbiest influences the State of Ohio to invest in such endeavors as “Coins” we never even hear about it until it bankrupts the Workers Comp fund. Local news just doesn’t do much reporting on State issues and goings on. So we are pretty much removed from much of the debate which goes on there.

But when the voice of the people is prevented from being heard, in a City which in its entirety covers a mere 5.6 miles, the problem isn’t just with the greedy, the slimy or the spineless. The problem is “us”.

How utterly inconceivable and surreally bizarre that words like, closed meetings, ignored, lack of accountability, predetermined conclusions, fearful, retribution, retaliation, harassment is now the common way residents refer to engagement with our School Board, Council and Mayor.

Has this always been the norm in Lakewood?

When did this become the norm?

Do any see this current “norm” as temporary?

Who lead us here. What drives this shift in power? When will enough be enough?

Posted: **Wed Jan 13, 2010 5:24 pm**

Shelley Hurd wrote:But when the voice of the people is prevented from being heard, in a City which in its entirety covers a mere 5.6 miles, the problem isn’t just with the greedy, the slimy or the spineless. The problem is “us”.

How utterly inconceivable and surreally bizarre that words like, closed meetings, ignored, lack of accountability, predetermined conclusions, fearful, retribution, retaliation, harassment is now the common way residents refer to engagement with our School Board, Council and Mayor.

Has this always been the norm in Lakewood?

When did this become the norm?

Do any see this current “norm” as temporary?

Who lead us here. What drives this shift in power? When will enough be enough?

Shelley

Might be one of the most important posts of all time on the Deck.

This project was created to give ALL and equal voice, and to allow people to speak
up and tell their stories and ask their questions. I have posted time and time again
about the only really safe place is in the light of day. Do the back room deals, and
spread rumors on phones, and they will come back and get you. Step into the light
of day, and ask the questions in the open, and if nothing else revenge becomes harder
and illegal.

That said, I have a list of people that have gotten calls from "civic leaders" oh wait,
Sharon forgive me, "Lakewood's gifted civic leaders" that have called people, searched
them out in coffee shops and spoke with other officials and told them to stop posting,
to stop asking the questions, or basically give up their first amendment rights.

To me this is an outrage, but to the people it was frightening, and I have someone
looking into that.

Lakewood used to be a very friendly place where all talked and helped. But after the,
what did Jay call it, oh yeah "The Debacle." People started to get up tight. It caused a
true civil war in this city, and sent us on the path of some elected officials avoiding
public discussions because they thought it would save them from public scrutiny. Well
talking with many I feel those days might be behind us again. Many friends I have not
spoken with sine the WestEnd are coming back out, and will take up the challenge.

With the schools and the city needing money, we the citizens have a rare opportunity to
ask, no make them do the right thing. And that is what is right for all of us, not just a
few. I have faith that those who have spoken up in the past will speak up again. Why
just last week I ran into someone who works for the Institute of Justice, and they asked
about what was going on in Lakewood.

.

Posted: **Wed Jan 13, 2010 7:21 pm**

That is really too bad.

Quote from Jim O'Bryan:

That said, I have a list of people that have gotten calls from "civic leaders" oh wait,
Sharon forgive me, "Lakewood's gifted civic leaders" that have called people, searched
them out in coffee shops and spoke with other officials and told them to stop posting,
to stop asking the questions, or basically give up their first amendment rights.

To me this is an outrage, but to the people it was frightening, and I have someone
looking into that.

I wondered why I did not get a response to my question to Kevin Butler. He usually answers any questions very promptly and forthrightly. And I respect him for that.

Quote from Kevin Butler:
I've seen nothing that would suggest any group has undue influence over your local elected officials when it comes to these issues.

Kevin,
The problem is the appearance of influence.

When 2 members of City Council sit on the Board of Directors of LakewoodAlive.
And LakewoodAlive receives the majority of it general funding from CBDG money.
And council makes the final decision on distribution of these funds.

Even if no inpropriety has occured.
The appearance does not look good.
And any citizen should question that appearance.

My question is this the only CDC or non-profit that Council distributes funds to that it members also sit on it's Board of Directors? If so that makes it even more unusual. And the appearance then triggers more questions.

I am a citizen just asking questions.

Rhonda Loje

It's too bad that our "officials" will not respond in this forum and discourage each other not to respond to questions posed by citizens they they either depend upon for support or should serve as public servants.

This does not serve the citizens of Lakewood well and has an appearance of arrogance.

I still can vote! And so can all of you!

Rhonda Loje

Posted: **Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:35 pm**

This post is mis-titled. There is no community uproar, just the rattling of a few nuts in a near-empty forum, each claiming to have secret lists of thousands who agree with them.

It seems this bunk is not selling, and that the vast majority of the people of Lakewood are satisfied having their elected officials do what they were elected for, and to elect someone else if they think they can do a better job.

I would rather see my representatives working on solving some problems, rather than constantly answering near-incoherent missives from people who want to run things, but don't want to take the responsibility for running them.

Posted: **Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:09 pm**

Will,
It's too bad that your response was so insulting and arrogant.
Its very hard to take you seriously.
But if that is your point of view.
So be it.

Rhonda

Posted: **Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:15 pm**

Rhonda loje wrote:My question is this the only CDC or non-profit that Council distributes funds to that it members also sit on its Board of Directors?

Rhonda, sorry, I missed your question above. Unfortunately, I don't know the answer to this but I'll post all the organizations Council funded with CDBG money slated to arrive from HUD in 2010. I will note that all CDBG recommendations come to Council after being fully debated in numerous public meetings of the Citizens' Advisory Committee. More on the CDBG program and the application and recommendation process here.

Sometimes the city partners with organizations in ways that generate board seats for the city (e.g., Council and the mayor have board seats at Lakewood Hospital, which for decades has been leased by the city to the Clinic). This is rare, and frankly, should be rare.

Any time this kind of arrangement exists, we must be extra vigilant about preserving the integrity of our decisions on behalf of the public. In LakewoodAlive's case, I believe we have done that in a very open process. It may be of little use to try to convince some of the folks on this site of that, but perhaps it's worth me saying.

Posted: **Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:00 pm**

Kevin,
Thank you for your response.

There is no need to post those organizations. They are posted on City website. I have reviewed the process.

Kevin Butler's quote: In LakewoodAlive's case, I believe we have done that in a very open process.

But I am confused....So are you saying that members of council are appointed to the board of Lakewood Alive just like Lakewood Hospital? Is that the open process you are speaking of? I'm not sure what open process you are speaking of?

I also agree with your quote.

Kevin Butler's quote: Any time this kind of arrangement exists, we must be extra vigilant about preserving the integrity of our decisions on behalf of the public.

That's why I have asked the question about council members and the mayor being on the board of directors for LakewoodAlive. Does this arrangement hold to your standard of being extra vigilant about preserving your integrity on behalf of the public?

I wonder?

Thank you Kevin for responding! I appreciate your response and time.

Rhonda

Posted: **Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:27 pm**

The process I speak of is the CAC and council legislative process.

Every year, the planning department takes applications from all sorts of organizations for HUD money. The 17-member Citizens' Advisory Committee vets those applications over the course of many meetings and makes recommendations on whether to grant the funding request, deny the funding request or grant the request but in a reduced amount. Once CAC's recommendations are made, Council can determine whether we agree or not.

In 2009, many organizations went through this process, as you know, and CAC recommended funding. In LakewoodAlive's case, CAC slashed that group's request in order to accommodate other organizations, but approved a percentage of the amount LA requested. Eventually, after several public meetings, Council (including the five members who are not board members) agreed to appropriate the reduced dollar amount.

It bears repeating that I am sensitive about any situations in which an appearance of impropriety may be given off. By the same token, Rhonda, I am convinced we made a sound decision to fund the programs and organizations recommended by CAC including those offered by LA. There was no inside collusion here, with respect to those who would have us believe officials are colluding at every opportunity.

Posted: **Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:44 pm**

Kevin Butler wrote:It bears repeating that I am sensitive about any situations in which an appearance of impropriety may be given off. By the same token, Rhonda, I am convinced we made a sound decision to fund the programs and organizations recommended by CAC including those offered by LA. There was no inside collusion here, with respect to those who would have us believe officials are colluding at every opportunity.

Kevin

Collusion seems like such an extreme word.

Just curious, once funds are approved, how are benchmarks measured?

Like when the city gives gives LA Board $50,000 to fix up his storefronts
and say $30,000 ends up fixing up a member of the board's storefront? Is there
oversight?
When LA sends in a bill for $71,000 er $38,000 for the design of the "DowntowN" sign.
(We were all told it was done by FREE volunteers, who checks that bill?)
Is there oversight to see how long it takes to put them up? Does that go through
the CAC Committee? When these two radically different groups LakewoodAlive the
Political Action Committee merge with the completely different LCPI was there
oversight to make sure the PAC no longer had any influence on the distribution
of NON-profit CAC/CDGB funding, to make sure it was not being used to fund PAC
items, which would make it all very illegal?

As I have often pointed out, I believe it would very hard to find a bigger supporter
of LA, than the Lakewood Observer. However, current management, no I am sorry
make that managers for life, fall way short of my expectations on what we need
running our only CDC.

Will

I prefer my politicians working for the city as well.

I have never claimed thousands of followers. I really hope everyone can make up their
own minds on what is best for them. You may be a big fan of regionalism, and have
decided that is best for your lifestlye. Me personally, I love that the county cities already
have many programs to bulk purchase rock salt, paper, supplies. That means we can take
those regions of the table for regionalism.

I still suffer from some very hard decisions I have seen the city make, and would love
to know how they got there.

What do you know of "First Tier Suburbs" why it was started, who was on the board, and
why I would even care here in Lakewood?

.

Posted: **Thu Jan 14, 2010 12:21 am**

Kevin,

Thank you Kevin for your response.

Kevin Butler's quote:

It bears repeating that I am sensitive about any situations in which an appearance of impropriety may be given off.

I am glad that you are sensitive to this situation which may have the appearance of impropriety. I will now wait to see if the City Council and the Mayor will work to rectify the appearance.

I will look forward to your actions as President of City Council.

Thank you for your forthright response.

I appreciate the work you do.

Rhonda

Posted: **Thu Jan 14, 2010 8:30 am**

Kevin Butler

...." We won a grant to study the pros and cons with other west shore municipalities. This was well documented. The grant-funded study is underway in all those communities.

Kevin,

What grant did we win to fund the study pertaing to the regional consolidation of fire services?

Posted: **Thu Jan 14, 2010 4:00 pm**

Kevin Butler wrote:
Shelley Hurd wrote:[W]ill we see the full plan pertaining to the regional fire department and other "regional" plans on the City web site tomorrow?

There's no "full plan" (or partial plan) to consolidate fire services. We won a grant to study the pros and cons with other west shore municipalities. This was well documented. The grant-funded study is underway in all those communities. Please don't mistake this for a decision on anyone's part to regionalize fire.

I don't know of any other regional plans, as you call them.

Posted: **Thu Jan 14, 2010 4:56 pm**

Just a few general thoughts here...

In so many ways, communities are caught in no-win financial situations, particularly these days.

Because there ARE so many suburbs, are there ways that "regional" cooperative solutions can cut costs and streamline services? Of course there are, and many people would be perhaps surprised at the extent that suburbs (and even with Cleveland proper) already cooperate with cost saving "regionalized" cooperation.

In fact I think that it would be irresponsible to NOT look for further ways for cities to become more cost-effective through "regional" solutions.

At the same time, I hear NO ONE speaking about any complete mergers of municipalities. The debate, if there even is one, would be of cooperative degree only, I do believe.

In the case of groups like Lakewood Alive and other similar operations, these kinds of groups can, and do tremendously help the planning for future business and cultural aspects of a city. It takes proactive planning to come up with proposals that can pass muster when applying for funding and grants.

Could better communication between those kinds of involved parties and the citizenry could always be possible? Do some plans do not always go as they should?

Well, communication also has to entail citizen responsibility, as well as having citizen involvement in the process.

While storefront renovations and steet paving decisions can certainly entail subjective calls to be considered, at the same time, applying for legal funding for those causes is, and has always been a public process through public hearings and community oversight.

(often hotly debated by committee members, I might add- Just ask ANYONE who was on the CDBG committee with me for example, about my serious questioning of many of the groups that came hat-in-hand for monies...)

The fact is, you WANT planners and dreamers to keep coming up with ideas for your city. You may not always agree with them, but that's where it's YOUR responsibility to attend committee and council meetings to make your voices heard. As a former member of the CDBG committee, (and I've said this before) it was downright PITIFUL how few people came out to give input to those publically announced deliberations. Just about everyone seems to have an opinion "after the fact" about decisions that need to be addressed, but by then, the decisions had been made.

If you care, then dare to get involved and attend those meetings. Volunteer to be on those committees. Talk with the Mayor, or your councilperson about opportunities to help the city out. Roll up your sleeves and get involved. You'll certainly be glad that you did.

Back to the banjo...

Posted: **Thu Jan 14, 2010 5:17 pm**

Gary,
Your right!

Kevin,
I volunteer to be on the CDBG Committee.

Rhonda

Posted: **Thu Jan 14, 2010 6:24 pm**

Gary Rice wrote:At the same time, I hear NO ONE speaking about any complete mergers of municipalities. The debate, if there even is one, would be of cooperative degree only, I do believe.

In the case of groups like Lakewood Alive and other similar operations, these kinds of groups can, and do tremendously help the planning for future business and cultural aspects of a city. It takes proactive planning to come up with proposals that can pass muster when applying for funding and grants.

Gary

I am a performance orientated kind of guy. Since 2002, that would be 8 years, Mary
Anne Crampton, Shannon Strachan, Jay Foran and a host of "civic leaders have trade positions
on LCPI and or LakewoodAlive. It would be nice if they had just one success story, just one.

Since that time, volunteers with out being shepherded by $60,000 a year flock herders, have
worked to rebuild Madison Ave. Madison Park, Skate Parks, storefronts, CSA, bike programs,
and on and on and on and on.

This is madness.

FWIW

.

The Observation Deck

Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?

Re: Community uproar - but where is the cohesion?