The Observation Deck

A local politician was voicing some opposition to web sites like the Observer because open discussion might "wake the dead".

I think that campaigns should be about issues, ideas and solutions. Those who know something about political campaigns generally disagree. They assert that every idea becomes a target and every proposed solution opens the candidate up to ridicule. Engaging in open discussion also tends to highlite things that might put the City in a bad light. Since I disagree...

The recent census showed an 11% vacancy rate in the City of Lakewood. Far higher than the past census figure of about 6%. The census vacancy rate is about twice the vacancy rate reported by the Post Office. Someones numbers are wrong. If the census numbers are wrong they missed a lot of people. If the census numbers are right we have a bigger problem than we think.

Many people have pointed out that housing is key to a healthy City. If that is true what are the numbers telling us? Shouldn't that be a campaign issue? Or should we let the dead stay dead?

Bill Call wrote:A local politician was voicing some opposition to web sites like the Observer because open discussion might "wake the dead".

I think that campaigns should be about issues, ideas and solutions. Those who know something about political campaigns generally disagree. They assert that every idea becomes a target and every proposed solution opens the candidate up to ridicule. Engaging in open discussion also tends to highlite things that might put the City in a bad light. Since I disagree...

Bill

Funny how just 8 years ago 100% of the politicians in this city said, "All they need are real
names to take part in a discussion." Now it would seem that most fear the heat so much
they must marginalize the heat in the kitchen, while working to shut down the collective
voice of residents and businesses.

Far easier to control the message in private phone calls, and coffee clatches.

I hope the residents take notice of who is open, and willing to be accountable and who is not.

In 2011, we need nothing more importantly in this community than more light and
accountability.

However it would seem that back rooms, hallways, and vindictiveness permeates this city
as the big comment from many running for office is they are hearing, "We will vote for
you, but we dare not support you publicly, for it could hurt us." How sad, in a country
built on civic discourse, public open, and the ability to discuss and support openly that
peer pressure, and revenge would control the discussions.

As for housing, this is what happens when a city takes their eye off the ball for shiny
objects in downtown. One cannot help but wonder how this city would look had we put
our money into our number one business, housing, instead of 5 Guys, an empty Bailey
Building, and other shiny objects that do not add to property values, and in the long run
actually subtract from them.

FWIW

.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:
I hope the residents take notice of who is open, and willing to be accountable and who is not.

Jim,

At this point, it sure appears to be a very "murky" picture.

Will the real champions of openness and accountability please reveal yourselves! Then again, maybe it's just not possible if you want to be a viable candidate in Lakewood.(?)

Scott Meeson

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

As for housing, this is what happens when a city takes their eye off the ball for shiny
objects in downtown. One cannot help but wonder how this city would look had we put
our money into our number one business, housing, instead of 5 Guys, an empty Bailey
Building, and other shiny objects that do not add to property values, and in the long run
actually subtract from them.

Jim,

I'm hoping that you,as a potential mayoral candidate,can explain how commercial development and improvement will hurt property values in the long run? I ask because I see a need to be focused on both residential and commercial improvement/development in this city.

Help me get a better grip of where you're coming from on this very important subject.



Scott Meeson

Scott Meeson wrote:

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

As for housing, this is what happens when a city takes their eye off the ball for shiny
objects in downtown. One cannot help but wonder how this city would look had we put
our money into our number one business, housing, instead of 5 Guys, an empty Bailey
Building, and other shiny objects that do not add to property values, and in the long run
actually subtract from them.

Jim,

I'm hoping, as a potential mayoral candidate, that you can explain how commercial development and improvement will hurt property values in the long run? I ask because I see a need to be focused on both residential and commercial improvement/development in this city.

Help me get a better grip of where you're coming from on this very important subject.

Scott Meeson

Scott

I am answering this, as a Lakewoodite, nothing more. I really refuse to even discuss as
a potential candidate. I grabbed the paperwork, and signed for it. At this point we probably
should not put to much emphasis on my fall plans. Of course at the same time, I would
think we are all equal in this discussion. Butcher, Baker, Indian, Chief...

Residential/Commercial

These things are not mutually exclusive. We must maintain commercial property and assist
where we can. But we must also protect and build our residential areas as well. RESPECT
to me is the key issue.

Right now we are watching problems with McDonald's turning a pretty quite couple corners
into something people are talking about moving from. How much is a piece of property
worth when the neighbor goes from quiet lot to drive through? How much are the houses
worth on Elmwood, Victoria, if Marc's is expanded?

In every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. This is one of the reasons why I
understand why some ED people fought to kill the hotel on Sloane. It would have changed
the value of their homes with increased traffic, and light and sound pollution.

You do not change the balance of a community without changing the flavor of that community.

Does it mean you cannot change?

NO, it means you have to figure out who you are, why people are there, what is needed
and work to correct these things. It is why we need to at least have some fundamental
understanding of why 75% of this community is here.

OR, do we reinvent the city, and try to start fresh?

Do we go from a bedroom community of workers, and now home based businesses, many
that pay very well, to a city subsidized businesses.

Do we bank on something that is proven, and requires much less in city services, or do
we roll the dice and take on retail, industrial, more commercial property? Is that commercial
property better as retail, government, office space, ????

Scott

Do you want the house next to McDonald's?

Would you pay more or less for it?

Make sense?

Arthur is a beautiful street that was proposing some historical changes to take it back to
the 30s. Street lights, decorative walls and bushes, something that many would argue
add to the value of the street and the property on the street. Big yards, big trees, big
homes, but now, no wall, but a giant CVS Superstore. Sound pollution, light pollution,
traffic, even if only one way, worse, and another small bite out of the "bedroom community."
For the record I am not sure what else could/can be done. I will generally chose tax paying
over non-tax paying. Like the theater, what else goes there?

So how far up do we develop Arthur? Mars? Lakeland? Does a city with growing strip malls
add to the value of a house 1 block away? 2 blocks away? I am not saying strip malls are
good or bad, I am just pointing on, the two can have drastic effects on each other.

It would be nice to have some idea, what are we trying to do or be. And why would that
not be a great public discussion? Why shouldn't a city love to discuss its brand, or what we need?

This is just a small part of what can change a city, sometimes almost overnight.


FWIW


.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

Scott Meeson wrote:

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

As for housing, this is what happens when a city takes their eye off the ball for shiny
objects in downtown. One cannot help but wonder how this city would look had we put
our money into our number one business, housing, instead of 5 Guys, an empty Bailey
Building, and other shiny objects that do not add to property values, and in the long run
actually subtract from them.

Jim,

I'm hoping, as a potential mayoral candidate, that you can explain how commercial development and improvement will hurt property values in the long run? I ask because I see a need to be focused on both residential and commercial improvement/development in this city.

Help me get a better grip of where you're coming from on this very important subject.

Scott Meeson

Scott

I am answering this, as a Lakewoodite, nothing more. I really refuse to even discuss as
a potential candidate. I grabbed the paperwork, and signed for it. At this point we probably
should not put to much emphasis on my fall plans. Of course at the same time, I would
think we are all equal in this discussion. Butcher, Baker, Indian, Chief...

Residential/Commercial

These things are not mutually exclusive. We must maintain commercial property and assist
where we can. But we must also protect and build our residential areas as well. RESPECT
to me is the key issue.

Right now we are watching problems with McDonald's turning a pretty quite couple corners
into something people are talking about moving from. How much is a piece of property
worth when the neighbor goes from quiet lot to drive through? How much are the houses
worth on Elmwood, Victoria, if Marc's is expanded?

In ever action there is an equal and opposite reaction. This is one of the reasons why I
understand why some ED people fought to kill the hotel on Sloane. It would have changed
the value of their homes with increased traffic, and light and sound pollution.

You do not change the balance of a community without changing the flavor of that community.

Does it mean you cannot change?

NO, it means you have to figure out who you are, why people are there, what is needed
and work to correct these things. It is why we need to at least have some fundamental
understanding of why 75% of this community is here.

OR, do we reinvent the city, and try to start fresh?

Do we go from a bedroom community of workers, and now home based businesses, many
that pay very well, to a city subsidized businesses.

Do we bank on something that is proven, and requires much less in city services, or do
we roll the dice and take on retail, industrial, more commercial property? Is that commercial
property better as retail, government, office space, ????

Scott

Do you want the house next to McDonald's?

Would you pay more or less for it?

Make sense?

Arthur is a beautiful street that was proposing some historical changes to take it back to
the 30s. Street lights, decorative walls and bushes, something that many would argue
add to the value of the street and the property on the street. Big yards, big trees, big
homes, but now, no wall, but a giant CVS Superstore. Sound pollution, light pollution,
traffic, even if only one way, worse, and another small bite out of the "bedroom community."
For the record I am not sure what else could/can be done. I will generally chose tax paying
over non-tax paying. Like the theater, what else goes there?

So how far up do we develop Arthur? Mars? Lakeland? Does a city with growing strip malls
add to the value of a house 1 block away? 2 blocks away? I am not saying strip malls are
good or bad, I am just pointing on, the two can have drastic effects on each other.

Nice to have some idea, what we are trying to do or be. And why would that not be a
great public discussion? Why shouldn't a city love to discuss its brand, or what we need?

This is just a small part of what can change a city, sometimes almost overnight.


FWIW


.

Jim,

Thank you for your response.

A non-argumentative question: Beyond what our zoning code has already established, how far do we want to limit the property rights of our commercial property owners in order to provide the proper amount of respect to our residential property owners?



Scott

Scott Meeson wrote:Jim,

Thank you for your response.

A non-argumentative question: Beyond what our zoning code has already established, how far do we want to limit the property rights of our commercial property owners in order to provide the proper amount of respect to our residential property owners?

Scott

Scott

It is a massive balancing act with no correct answer, I believe a city is pretty easy to run,
and it is also very easy to screw up. You can head down a road with no change, and affect
massive change. Just talking about CVS, McDonald, use or non-use of eminent domain,
schools, developers, realtors, stores coming and going, all provide this strange dance.

If a city is 85% full, in a region in serious decline, and was just named best. How much are
you willing to bet on the future? How far do you want the businesses to go south on
Detroit? South on Madison? North towards Clifton? Develop along I-90? Or are we ready
to cash in on our Lakefront?

What is the right answer, we do have zoning, we do have ARB, we do have building codes
but do we have an idea? What is that idea? To be at the whim of regional winds, or self
rule with the ability to cash in on our uniqueness?

What are the thoughts of council? The Boards? The Mayor and candidates? Does it matter?

There is a lot going on in the world, country, state, county, and city. It all has massive
impacts on the lives and the stake holders in each entity. If we had put into housing what
we put into Economic Development these past 10 years, where would we be? Can more
consumers lead to more business and tax $$$$, or do more businesses lead to more
property owners? With most things I believe it is worth more than one discussion.

FWIW

PS

Scott

A couple little things.

One speaking for myself and if I may be so bold Bill Call and others. When we speak of
housing programs bringing in criminals, indigents, challenged, refuges. It is not because
we hate these people and think they do not deserve better lives. The Calls, are really one
of the most loving giving families I know. It is because it is all such a balancing act, and
you really need to keep track of the "game." or it can get away from you.

About the discussion
This entire project was named "Transparent City" at one point. It was that collectively we
could broach many ideas and digest them and comment on them. Find good and faults and
move the idea forward. It cam from a group of people that saw the city waste ten years on
one idea that when it finally saw the light of day was so full of holes and lies it was laughable, and a tremendous waste of everyone's energy and time.

The only real agenda at the LO is to provide the space for the discussion, and vetting of ideas.

For almost 9 years many of us have worked hard and given time to this project, not
because we think our ideas are better than yours. But because we are hoping yours ideas
are better than ours, and if not together we might stumble on a third or fourth person that
can make it better.


.

Betsy Voinovich

Jim O'Bryan wrote:
However it would seem that back rooms, hallways, and vindictiveness permeates this city
as the big comment from many running for office is they are hearing, "We will vote for
you, but we dare not support you publicly, for it could hurt us." How sad, in a country
built on civic discourse, public open, and the ability to discuss and support openly that
peer pressure, and revenge would control the discussions.

Word is out that only machine backed candidates will get public support. I don’t have a big problem with that as long as the machine can get something accomplished. I have a gnawing fear that it’s back to business as usual and that the “Lakewood” Spring is over.
I still have some hopes for Ed Fitzgerald but I think he is already planning his run for Governor and that his judgment will be clouded by his need to get the backing of the Democratic Party.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:As for housing, this is what happens when a city takes their eye off the ball for shiny
objects in downtown. One cannot help but wonder how this city would look had we put
our money into our number one business, housing, instead of 5 Guys, an empty Bailey
Building, and other shiny objects that do not add to property values, and in the long run
actually subtract from them.

You mean the Downtown Disneyland concept where the City of Cleveland spends hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies to bribe people into moving where they don’t want to live and entice business to move where they don’t want to go at the cost of emptying out neighborhoods and burdening the rest of us with the cost of the subsidies?
Lakewood City Council just changed the housing ordinance to address the vacant housing issue. It requires the registration of vacant houses and other reporting requirements. The real question is: Why are they vacant? What does the vacancy rate tell us?
It tells me a couple of things:

We have a surplus of housing.
Housing becomes obsolete.
It’s hard to compete with hundreds of millions in taxpayer subsidies for downtown apartments and new freeway inner changes.
The change in the ordinance is a reaction to the increase in vacancies and does not address the cause of the increase or offer a solution.

Scott Meeson wrote:I'm hoping, as a potential mayoral candidate, that you can explain how commercial development and improvement will hurt property values in the long run? I ask because I see a need to be focused on both residential and commercial improvement/development in this city.

Help me get a better grip of where you're coming from on this very important subject.

Scott Meeson

The disadvantage to being part of the process and responding to questions and offering solutions is that people keep asking you to explain yourself!

On one hand commercial development is as important as residential development because commercial properties generate a lot more income and property taxes per square foot than residential properties.

On the other hand the more people you have in a City the busier and more desirable the commercial property becomes.

I don’t fault the Mayor and Council (too much) on the housing issue. Federal housing policies, NOACA polices, County polices and the policies of quasi governmental organizations like Mental Health Services are busy undoing all the good that they do. I guess if it were me I’d be going public and asking voters to just say no to their funding until they change their behavior. Good luck with that!

I guess I would like the City to have a more aggressive housing and development policy. By that I mean a well funded effort to demolish obsolete housing, build new apartments, new parks and a block by block concentration on housing improvements instead of a scatter shot approach.

Of course the City was involved in the Rockport Square development, the Marc’s Plaza development and the still born Drug Mart Plaza development, and in efforts to discourage the Madison Village concept so maybe I should be careful what I wish for. Again that is not a criticism of the Mayor or Council, these issues are confronting cities all over the region and the country.