The Observation Deck

The Question Of The Week this past month has been.

Question for Saturday, March 10th, 2012:

Should the city of Lakewood close Kauffman Park, Madison Park and Lakewood Park early because of graffiti?
780 responders.
• Yes:31.7%
• No:67.3%
• :1%


This was a very informal survey.


.

How informal?

I don't count surveys as reliable unless I know how the data was collected, informal or no.

Thealexa Becker wrote:How informal?

I don't count surveys as reliable unless I know how the data was collected, informal or no.

Question on the front page.

.

Lakewood Park was NEVER on the list.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:The Question Of The Week this past month has been.

Question for Saturday, March 10th, 2012:

Should the city of Lakewood close Kauffman Park, Madison Park and Lakewood Park early because of graffiti?
780 responders.
• Yes:31.7%
• No:67.3%
• :1%


This was a very informal survey.


.

What I get from this is that people who read the observer were able to take a poll and a little over half of them do not necessarily think the parks should close early strictly for graffiti. This being said, theres a chance they think the parks should be closed for other reasons.

Not to mention 780 responders out of 52,000 in Lakewood (not to mention all the other people that could have responded, being an open site) is not a very good representation. Add on top of that the likeliness the people responding are LO readers that might be more likely to agree with the statement that the parks should not be closed earlier.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:The Question Of The Week this past month has been.

Question for Saturday, March 10th, 2012:

Should the city of Lakewood close Kauffman Park, Madison Park and Lakewood Park early because of graffiti?
780 responders.
• Yes:31.7%
• No:67.3%
• :1%


This was a very informal survey.


.

100% of graffitists would prefer the parks to close early. Presumably so they can go about their business without any eye witnesses. Anyone there after hours can be presumed to be up to no good and be ignored. Afterall, what could they be possibly be doing in the park during the banned hours?

Charlie Page wrote:100% of graffitists would prefer the parks to close early. Presumably so they can go about their business without any eye witnesses. Anyone there after hours can be presumed to be up to no good and be ignored. Afterall, what could they be possibly be doing in the park during the banned hours?

I must have missed this second very important poll on the front page.

Christopher Bindel wrote:Lakewood Park was NEVER on the list.

Chris Bindel is right, Lakewood Park wasn't on the early closing list. Why it wasn't I'm not entirely sure. There is graffiti from time to time in the club house in Kids Cove. I don't recall seeing graffiti elsewhere in the park. Probably because the park is well visited for many hours of the day. People in our parks are the best deterrent to this type of activity.

J Hrlec wrote:

Charlie Page wrote:100% of graffitists would prefer the parks to close early. Presumably so they can go about their business without any eye witnesses. Anyone there after hours can be presumed to be up to no good and be ignored. Afterall, what could they be possibly be doing in the park during the banned hours?

I must have missed this second very important poll on the front page.

J, you didn't miss any important poll here as there wasn't one. I just asked myself if I were a graffitist, would I want people around who could possibly identify me? Or would I like to carry out my business without much of a threat of disruption and still get home in time to get a good nights sleep?

J Hrelc and all.

Would it be better if this was like most polls or community inquiries in Lakewood?

Determine the answer, then ask the questions then ignore all the answers?

Hey, just presenting what we got.

.

Charlie Page wrote:

J Hrlec wrote:

Charlie Page wrote:100% of graffitists would prefer the parks to close early. Presumably so they can go about their business without any eye witnesses. Anyone there after hours can be presumed to be up to no good and be ignored. Afterall, what could they be possibly be doing in the park during the banned hours?

I must have missed this second very important poll on the front page.

J, you didn't miss any important poll here as there wasn't one. I just asked myself if I were a graffitist, would I want people around who could possibly identify me? Or would I like to carry out my business without much of a threat of disruption and still get home in time to get a good nights sleep?

First a question and some clarification for myself. Was graffiti specifically the reason (noted by the city in an official document) that this topic has been discussed? Or is that just to throw focus in one specific direction per the ramblings of others on the "Deck"

Second, unless your truly a graffitist, and even then... we could never globally answer what times are best for performing the art of graffiti. Thus it is irrelevant and rather pointless if a serious discussion is desired.

If this was just for levity... good one!

Jim O'Bryan wrote:Hey, just presenting what we got.

It's all good, I just wasn't sure why the poll was specifically pointing as graffiti as the only reason. I probably missed the official notes on why city hall is discussing this option to close parks early.

Here what I got out of it:

1% of Lakewoods population say the parks should not be shut down early specifically due to graffiti

.5% of Lakewoods population say the parks should be shut down early specifically due to graffiti

The other 98% of lakewood's population has not responded.

... so I would assume either a lack of interest in polls or the topic in general. Other than presenting what results the LO obtained, it really does not represent any useful information IMO.

J Hrlec wrote:

Jim O'Bryan wrote:Hey, just presenting what we got.

It's all good, I just wasn't sure why the poll was specifically pointing as graffiti as the only reason. I probably missed the official notes on why city hall is discussing this option to close parks early.

Here what I got out of it:

1% of Lakewoods population say the parks should not be shut down early specifically due to graffiti

.5% of Lakewoods population say the parks should be shut down early specifically due to graffiti

The other 98% of lakewood's population has not responded.

... so I would assume either a lack of interest in polls or the topic in general. Other than presenting what results the LO obtained, it really does not represent any useful information IMO.

J Hrelc

Reasons the parks were closing early.
1) Loitering
2) Graffiti
It was not crime, it was not mob scenes, it was not unsafe though originally graffiti was
disguised as a safety issue. When pressed, "Graffiti" came out.

However that was not the ringer, the ringer was putting Lakewood Park in the mix.

The reason, another reason to talk about what at least some people are thinking.

.

J Hrlec wrote:

Jim O'Bryan wrote:Hey, just presenting what we got.

It's all good, I just wasn't sure why the poll was specifically pointing as graffiti as the only reason. I probably missed the official notes on why city hall is discussing this option to close parks early.

Here what I got out of it:

1% of Lakewoods population say the parks should not be shut down early specifically due to graffiti

.5% of Lakewoods population say the parks should be shut down early specifically due to graffiti

The other 98% of lakewood's population has not responded.

... so I would assume either a lack of interest in polls or the topic in general. Other than presenting what results the LO obtained, it really does not represent any useful information IMO.

Or the other 98% don't necessarily read the Lakewood Observer or didn't read it so rigorously as to notice the poll.

Honestly, the poll is basically FYI, hardly conclusive evidence one way or another of the opinions of Lakewood residents. Unfortunately, there is really no good way of unofficially gathering everyone's opinion. The joys of data collecting...

Jim,

Closing Kauffman Park early was not only a bad move but bad messaging from city hall. I’ve spent numerous hours in Kauffman Park volunteering my time at the basketball courts. Here is what I’ve noticed: when the park is full of activities and thriving with families, the park is a safe place for residents. Consequently, when it’s empty and there are limited activities the park does not attract the best crowds.

When communities begin to retreat from their parks it sends a message to residents that the parks aren’t safe and neither are its neighborhoods. How bad was the messaging on this? With the saturation of information people receive, they are more likely to read the headlines. I’ve encountered many people that are my age (29) that are either renters or young home owners that plan on raising their family here. Furthermore, these are the type of policies and headlines that make potential long term residents question whether they would like to remain in Lakewood.

In fact, earlier this evening, I found out that a close friend of mine who has kids in the Lakewood City School District sold his home and is moving to a western suburb. Headlines such as this scare people:

Hours Reduced at Two Parks in Lakewood
[i]In an effort to curb vandalism, Madison and Kauffman parks are going to close earlier.

These are the unintended consequences of bad public policy that spread fear throughout neighborhoods.

Ward 1 Councilman David Anderson gets it:

“It sends the wrong signal and the wrong message to our community,” Anderson said. He added that there are likely alternatives that the city could explore. Rather than instituting earlier closing hours, Anderson said, the city should spend time exploring ways to make the parks “more accessible to more people at more times.”

http://www.cleveland.com/lakewood/index ... ves_2.html

What is the logic in the closing? If I want to deface or vandalize a park I would more likely conduct this activity when no one is around. If it closes early, that means fewer activities for people and more opportunities for vandals.

How was this decision by council made? What are the crime statistics?

Kauffman Park is a very safe and enjoyable place. I give a great deal of credit to Friends of Kauffman Park for bringing awareness and activities to the city’s central park.