The Observation Deck

So I just read through the minutes of that Public Safety Meeting and yes I would say I think they should have dug deeper into the argument, done more research and discussed it more/deferred it for another meeting. However a few points to clarify based on what I read and what you have said.

Fact, the two that voted to close, never gave it
a second thought, they went with Joe's decision.

By saying that they did not give it a second thought makes it sound like they didn’t ask any questions and just took his word and blindly voted. That is not the case, both Juris and Nowlin asked questions to both Beno and Chief Malley before making their decisions.

Also, although graffiti was given as one of the reasons for closing the parks early, it was actually not discussed much as a reason in the meeting itself. Actually it was kind of pushed aside as not being as important as understanding why large groups of kids were in the parks, in the dark, late at night.

Council…as they are overworked under paid and some just tired.

I will have to agree with this statement.

No different from making us carry garbage to the curb with no real savings or benefits.

You might want to look into some updated numbers.

Did they even do the study on traffic Councilman Juris said they did but
never presented to anyone? Did they analyze the cost of the new poles, new die cut signs, and the confusion over the new traffic patterns, or did they just guess, or go along with
a friend?

This is all public record, if you want to know, ask for it.

Look at the scope of the issues not merely the focal point, and it becomes very disturbing.

Do your research and it might be easier to understand.

I want to point out for years I have thought council dreadfully underpaid, the mayor should
also be paid more.

Your absolutely right, and the issue has come to council several times, most recently in the summer of 2010 (I believe don’t quote me), however it is never been able to pass as they are afraid of voting themselves out of a job.

2.) was this really Director Beno's initiative or was he merely a puppet at the end of the PuppetMaster's strings or a mouthpiece sounding off for some predisposed agenda?

According to the committee meeting minutes, which support my original theory as stated yesterday, the idea to close the parks earlier were brought up by park employees first.

Mr. Beno explained that the idea of closing Madison and Kauffman parks one
hour after sunset was brought up by park managers.

Christopher Bindel wrote:So I just read through the minutes of that Public Safety Meeting and yes I would say I think they should have dug deeper into the argument, done more research and discussed it more/deferred it for another meeting. However a few points to clarify based on what I read and what you have said.

Fact, the two that voted to close, never gave it
a second thought, they went with Joe's decision.

By saying that they did not give it a second thought makes it sound like they didn’t ask any questions and just took his word and blindly voted. That is not the case, both Juris and Nowlin asked questions to both Beno and Chief Malley before making their decisions.

Also, although graffiti was given as one of the reasons for closing the parks early, it was actually not discussed much as a reason in the meeting itself. Actually it was kind of pushed aside as not being as important as understanding why large groups of kids were in the parks, in the dark, late at night.

Council…as they are overworked under paid and some just tired.

I will have to agree with this statement.

No different from making us carry garbage to the curb with no real savings or benefits.

You might want to look into some updated numbers.

Did they even do the study on traffic Councilman Juris said they did but
never presented to anyone? Did they analyze the cost of the new poles, new die cut signs, and the confusion over the new traffic patterns, or did they just guess, or go along with
a friend?

This is all public record, if you want to know, ask for it.

Look at the scope of the issues not merely the focal point, and it becomes very disturbing.

Do your research and it might be easier to understand.

I want to point out for years I have thought council dreadfully underpaid, the mayor should
also be paid more.

Your absolutely right, and the issue has come to council several times, most recently in the summer of 2010 (I believe don’t quote me), however it is never been able to pass as they are afraid of voting themselves out of a job.

2.) was this really Director Beno's initiative or was he merely a puppet at the end of the PuppetMaster's strings or a mouthpiece sounding off for some predisposed agenda?

According to the committee meeting minutes, which support my original theory as stated yesterday, the idea to close the parks earlier were brought up by park employees first.

Mr. Beno explained that the idea of closing Madison and Kauffman parks one
hour after sunset was brought up by park managers.

Thanks for the info Chris. It's good to have some facts.

No problem. If any one would like to see the minutes I would be happy to pass them along, just contact me. And if you ever have questions about anything else, never be afraid to look into it. Contact the city and see the documents with your own eyes.

Christopher - PLEASE don't take what I'm about to say the wrong way because I know you only want to report accurately ... but what you are posting here is your interpretation of the council clerk's interpretation of what was said at any particular meeting. True documentation would be a word-for-word transcript of the audio tape of a meeting. (Am I being too much of a stickler?)

Does anyone find it odd that one needs to request the minutes of council committee meetings (Finance, Public Safety, Housing, etc.) but minutes of full bi-weekly council meeting are found online at onelakewood.com?? (although the last council meeting minutes posted there are from Feb 6, 2012.)

Peter Grossetti wrote:(Am I being too much of a stickler?)

Yes

Peter Grossetti wrote:Does anyone find it odd that one needs to request the minutes of council committee meetings (Finance, Public Safety, Housing, etc.) but minutes of full bi-weekly council meeting are found online at onelakewood.com?? (although the last council meeting minutes posted there are from Feb 6, 2012.)

No

hmmm ... perhaps it's just the 10 years as a US Coast Guard Public Affairs Specialist in me coming out?

Peter, you are right. It would be better to have a word for word transcript, unfortunately that would probably cost to much to produce for every meeting. Although it is not a perfect record it is better then Jim "facts" that often come out of thin air.

On your second point, I did think it kind of odd that I had to request the information rather then finding it online, however I once again think this is due to lake of personnel/financial resources to add it to the web site. Likewise this is why I would guess the Council minutes are so far behind.

Peter Grossetti wrote:hmmm ... perhaps it's just the 10 years as a US Coast Guard Public Affairs Specialist in me coming out?

heh ... well you're asking good questions whether I agree or not.

Sorry posted wrong note.


Was warned my metaphors lose people, so...

Meant this.

Some facts out of thin air.

They took roughly 2,740 hours a year of park enjoyment from the law abiding citizens.

For no reason that can be defended.

And they didn't even leave a twenty on the dresser.


.

Peter Grossetti wrote:Christopher - PLEASE don't take what I'm about to say the wrong way because I know you only want to report accurately ... but what you are posting here is your interpretation of the council clerk's interpretation of what was said at any particular meeting. True documentation would be a word-for-word transcript of the audio tape of a meeting. (Am I being too much of a stickler?)

Does anyone find it odd that one needs to request the minutes of council committee meetings (Finance, Public Safety, Housing, etc.) but minutes of full bi-weekly council meeting are found online at onelakewood.com?? (although the last council meeting minutes posted there are from Feb 6, 2012.)

Peter

Christopher does a damn good job posting and representing what done at council. I have
never seen anyone do it as fairly as Christopher.

With that said it is merely a record of what went on, while valuable and appreciated, it is
not the entire story.


FWIW


.

Christopher

Question 1
By saying that they did not give it a second thought makes it sound like they didn’t ask any questions and just took his word and blindly voted. That is not the case, both Juris and Nowlin asked questions to both Beno and Chief Malley before making their decisions.

Also, although graffiti was given as one of the reasons for closing the parks early, it was actually not discussed much as a reason in the meeting itself. Actually it was kind of pushed aside as not being as important as understanding why large groups of kids were in the parks, in the dark, late at night. [/quote]

Facts, they never gave it a second thought in security committee, then served cake at the
council meeting, under the duress of Councilman Anderson.

Graffiti was the official reason, and loitering. Did they have any numbers about the large
number of kids there, or all puffery. Did the mayor talk about when we hung out there
late with large groups of youth/friends? Did anyone present the crime records? Chris, I
was not there, what were THE FACTS they presented that you are demanding from I, an
ordinary citizen is now being demanded to provide. NO THEIR FACTS came out of thin air
too.

Council…as they are overworked under paid and some just tired.

I will have to agree with this statement.

People make mistakes when tired, and overworked, and underpaid. RIGHT?

No different from making us carry garbage to the curb with no real savings or benefits.

You might want to look into some updated numbers.

Three months ago through the city, the amount of time estimated for Lakewood to break even on the investment was 5 years. Don't forget, we bought a bunch of new trucks and
24,000 garbage cans give or take a couple thousand. It was my understanding the savings
were related o the retirement of works that would not be rehired. But?

Did they even do the study on traffic Councilman Juris said they did but
never presented to anyone? Did they analyze the cost of the new poles, new die cut signs, and the confusion over the new traffic patterns, or did they just guess, or go along with
a friend?

This is all public record, if you want to know, ask for it.

I did, remember many times. Lots of studies, not he one Shawn cited.

Look at the scope of the issues not merely the focal point, and it becomes very disturbing.

Do your research and it might be easier to understand.

Ditto my friend. When was the last time you asked finance when the garbage trucks
would be a wash? When was the last time you made public record demands?

I want to point out for years I have thought council dreadfully underpaid, the mayor should
also be paid more.

Your absolutely right, and the issue has come to council several times, most recently in the summer of 2010 (I believe don’t quote me), however it is never been able to pass as they are afraid of voting themselves out of a job.

So, you admit, that council is even willing to do itself a great disservice just so they can
stay on? That is what you are saying. They are afraid someone more qualified would come
along and get their seat, if they were paid more? You are in essence saying, they are
willing to screw the city over, just to keep their jobs. At the end of the day, I believe the
residents would still have to vote on it.

The mayor's position should be $150,00, the same as a city manager. Let's pull the classic
line out of the bag for this one. "We really got lucky with this group, but down the road we
may not get so lucky, so we might want to think about City Manager. Of course the
drawback is they are hired by council that we both agree are severely overworked, tired
and underpaid, and are willing to not pay themselves so they can keep their seats even
against the possible benefits to the city. Hmmmmmmmmmmm I like city managers
sometimes, but maybe we should wait until we are not so lucky.

2.) was this really Director Beno's initiative or was he merely a puppet at the end of the PuppetMaster's strings or a mouthpiece sounding off for some predisposed agenda?

According to the committee meeting minutes, which support my original theory as stated yesterday, the idea to close the parks earlier were brought up by park employees first.

Mr. Beno explained that the idea of closing Madison and Kauffman parks one
hour after sunset was brought up by park managers.

[/quote]

So let me get this straight, now a worker says to Director Beno, you know I am just not up
to keeping this park clean, maybe the city should close it?

So it is somehow better?

I think my head just blew up!

Council is taking our rights because an employee wasn't up to doing his job.

Well hell, might as well close them all. Get the little guys a break.

I wish someone would have said that sooner, I feel like an idiot.


.

Peter Grossetti wrote:two questions:

Peter

The first question is for a new thread.

In it, we should talk about the needs for this city, professional management, and what
council people get in similar situations. I right now think Cleveland has an interesting
method of doing things, though the members of council I have spoke with about it do
not like it.

2.) was this really Director Beno's initiative or was he merely a puppet at the end of the PuppetMaster's strings or a mouthpiece sounding off for some predisposed agenda?

No, and I never said that.

You do a great disservice to the massive web of conflict of interest that permeates this city
by making light of it.

This is more like, a series of unfortunate circumstances.

Real "Bonfire of the Vanties" type of stuff.

.

Jim O’Bryan wrote: Facts, they never gave it a second thought in security committee, then served cake at the
council meeting, under the duress of Councilman Anderson.

What?

Jim O’Bryan wrote:Graffiti was the official reason, and loitering.

You are correct, I was just saying that in the meeting that was not the predominantly discussed factor.

Jim O’Bryan wrote:Chris, I
was not there, what were THE FACTS they presented that you are demanding from I, an
ordinary citizen is now being demanded to provide.

I am not demanding that you give me facts, I just want when you say you are giving facts for them to actually be facts and not made up (going back to QSL).

Rather then me going over everything that was or wasn’t discussed in the meeting would you like me to just send the minutes to you?

Jim O’Bryan wrote:People make mistakes when tired, and overworked, and underpaid. RIGHT?

They can, but I prefer to have something to back up the fact that they messed up instead of a libelous “fact.”

Jim O’Bryan wrote:Three months ago through the city, the amount of time estimated for Lakewood to break even on the investment was 5 years. Don't forget, we bought a bunch of new trucks and
24,000 garbage cans give or take a couple thousand. It was my understanding the savings
were related o the retirement of works that would not be rehired. But?

The 2 trucks we bought as part of this process were bought to replace 2 trucks the city had replaced anyways. I don’t know where that fall in their break even figures. Also the department shrank drastically. I do not know the exact numbers but I think there was something like 25-30 employees involved in collection originally and now there are like 8. So even if it takes some time to break even, looking in the long run it will save the city money. As someone you is constantly talking about the future of the city and complaining that none of our politicians can look passed 4 years I would think you would understand that.

Jim O’Bryan wrote:

Did they even do the study on traffic Councilman Juris said they did but
never presented to anyone? Did they analyze the cost of the new poles, new die cut signs, and the confusion over the new traffic patterns, or did they just guess, or go along with
a friend?

[/b]

This is all public record, if you want to know, ask for it.
I did, remember many times. Lots of studies, not he one Shawn cited.

Before I move on with this one, I actually am not sure which study you are referring to. Could you clarify? I just want to make sure I’m following you.

Jim O’Bryan wrote:Ditto my friend. When was the last time you asked finance when the garbage trucks
would be a wash?

I haven’t but I am considering doing so, but I do remember from that meeting (which unfortunately I don’t have notes on as it was before I started writing for the Observer) that the majority of the cost was being covered by funds that had been put aside to replace those garbage trucks either way. So even if we didn’t get automated garbage collecting garbage truck we would still be paying off the traditional one, but I guess you would be ok with that?

Jim O’Bryan wrote:When was the last time you made public record demands?

If by that you mean fill out a form to receive public information, never. However when was the last time I asked for a public document and receive it? This afternoon, and many times previously.

Jim O’Bryan wrote:So, you admit, that council is even willing to do itself a great disservice just so they can
stay on? That is what you are saying. They are afraid someone more qualified would come
along and get their seat, if they were paid more? You are in essence saying, they are
willing to screw the city over, just to keep their jobs. At the end of the day, I believe the
residents would still have to vote on it.

That is not what I am saying at all. First of all if they raise the salary they will not get it in their current term. Each member of council would have to go through another election cycle before they could receive the new wage. And you are wrong, this would not have to go before the people to be approved unless a referendum be entered. But regardless the reason they don’t want to pass it is because 90% or more of the city would see it as them raising their own salary, and even though it is long over due (has not been changed since 1970, not even cost of living) people don’t like to see that and think there is something curupt about it (which there isn’t) and there for are more likely to vote them out to any one, who very well could be LESS qualified. That might not be the case but also could very easily be the case. The problem is the city is short on money and we are cutting things left and right (or spending now to save in the long run) so we can get by. Buy raising the salary of the Mayor or Council it will look to citizens that they are cutting services to give them self a rais (and they wouldn’t be wrong) so whether we agree that they need to be paid more or not does not matter because the money does not exist to do so (including making council full time).

J Hrlec wrote:

Grace O'Malley wrote:

there are greater problems in the city and in the world than what times the parks close.

Good point, Thealexa (Love your name, BTW

Why then, did council choose to take it upon themselves to close the parks early when there are far more serious and pressing issues?

Good point.

Although, I do believe that council can multitask (oh boy can't wait for the comments on this one heh) and do more than one thing at a time.

I can't speak for Thealexa, but i was assuming her statement was more about how residents seem to be up in arms and more vocal on this topic than some of the more urgent ones which exist.

You are correct, I was speaking about the unreasonable amount of emphasis being placed on the parks themselves.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:
It has just come to my attention that Quaker State and Lube has gotten a variance to keep their patio open in the back of the new property after 11pm.

Is Quaker Steak and Lube really going to have a back patio? Have they gotten a variance to keep the back patio open after 11pm? If so, who granted the variance?

Or is Jim's statement a total fabrication?