The Observation Deck

From http://www.cleveland.com/lakewood/index.ssf/2013/04/post_24.html#incart_river:

Ward 3 Councilman Shawn Juris said:

At the end of the day, we're looking to change behaviors.

Hey, Shawn:

This isn't social engineering - it's garbage collection!



From City Hall:

From: McHugh, Maureen (Council) [mailto:Maureen.McHugh2@lakewoodoh.net]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 2:59 PM
Subject: Public Works Committee Meeting Notice

Issued 04-17-13
NOTICE OF MEETING – Public Works

PLEASE POST

There will be a Public Works Committee meeting Monday, April 22, 2013 at
5:00 PM in the Jury Room of Lakewood City Hall, 12650 Detroit Avenue. The agenda is as follows:


1. Discussion with Public Works Department regarding automated recycling and parking




Shawn Juris, Chair
Thomas R. Bullock, Mary Louise Madigan; Members
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

Hopefully, Ward 1 Councilman David Anderson will attend the meeting as he seems to get it.


From http://www.cleveland.com/lakewood/index.ssf/2013/04/post_24.html#incart_river:

Ward 1 Councilman David Anderson, a guest of the committee, asked Beno why the city holds onto an inventory of spare bins, for both trash and recycling. Beno told Anderson shipping costs prohibit the city from ordering the bins as needed, but the city hasn't had to order more trash containers since 2010, the second year of the automated system.

Anderson disagreed with keeping a lot of spare bins in inventory, as then the city has to store and maintain the inventory.

"When you have inventory only two things happen, and both are bad: they either get damaged, or they sprout legs and walk away," Anderson told Beno.

***

"I just see a communication nightmare with (a potential parking ban)," Anderson said. Anderson also asked about the possibility of doing waste collection in four days, rather than five days.

Ward 3 Councilman Shawn Juris acknowledged this ban was multi-layered, and challenging, but in order to realize these efficiencies, the city might have to compromise and adjust.

By "the city" compromising and adjusting, Shawn really means you and me ... not City Hall.

Beware of any government plan that is based in whole or in part on a desire to change behavior.

The refuse departments job is to pick up trash in the most efficient and cost effective manner that does not unduly infringe upon peoples right to the quiet enjoyment of their home.

If the citizens of Lakewood have to rearrange their schedules and endure parking bans so trash can be collected then somebody at City Hall needs to rethink the plan.

Bill

A city hall exists to render services to the residents and businesses.

It does this through a variety of means, but 90% is through the collection or share of taxes,
fees, permits, fines, tickets, grants, federal funds etc.

When a city starts to drastically cut the services, especially those that differentiate from other
cities in the area, and start to cause drastic harm to that community.

According to Dr. Tom Bier "People want services, and they are willing to pay for them."

In a study from 2001, Dr. Bier places a heavy emphasis on the needs of a city to deliver
great services to its residents, "Home values across a metropolitan area are the result of various factors (besides the structure itself) such as location, schools, and city services."

So as these things continue to spiral out of control, it actually becomes a cycle of destruction
brought on by some that just do not get the simple idea that people, like to live where
it is nice. Not next to the bars, next to the 20 bay gas station, not the newest big box store.

Lakewood has spent a long time listening and telling us that the hundreds of millions
pumped into Downtown Business will make our lives better, and sustainable, even add to
the quality of life in Lakewood. What we are finding out is the opposite, and we have taken
the collective eye off the ball for shiny objects, and false promises.

So the man that wanted a brewery in St. James, and worked to close our parks early to
benefit bars nearby, is now making 1/5th of Lakewoodites park possibly 5 blocks away
from where they live so that Public Works can save a POSSIBLE $40,000 a year. BUT
FIRST WE HAVE TO SPEND $475,000!

This is madness, how does this even get to a vote?

Silver Lining - If we keep tearing down homes, residents will have plenty of places to park.

As residents maybe it is time to ask, "Where is our DowntowN bonus check?"

Another way we could save $40,000 is to go to 3 Council-At-Large positions, period,
no wards.

.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:Lakewood has spent a long time listening and telling us that the hundreds of millions pumped into Downtown Business will make our lives better, and sustainable, even add to the quality of life in Lakewood. What we are finding out is the opposite, and we have taken the collective eye off the ball for shiny objects, and false promises.

So the man that wanted a brewery in St. James, and worked to close our parks early to benefit bars nearby, is now making 1/5th of Lakewoodites park possibly 5 blocks away from where they live so that Public Works can save a POSSIBLE $40,000 a year. BUT FIRST WE HAVE TO SPEND $475,000!

This is madness, how does this even get to a vote?

Silver Lining - If we keep tearing down homes, residents will have plenty of places to park.

As residents maybe it is time to ask, "Where is our DowntowN bonus check?"

Another way we could save $40,000 is to go to 3 Council-At-Large positions, period,
no wards.

Hey, City Hall, Show Us the Map!

The Administration has a map … so show us the map.

City Hall claims that this “social engineering project” is not really that big of a deal because only 15% of the streets will be closed …. on any given business day.

Look out your front door.

On one business day out of the week, you will not be able to find a place to park on your own neighborhood street.

Is Lakewood still not one of the most densely populated cities between Chicago and New York?

Not everyone in Lakewood has driveways as long as those found on Wilbert Road, for example.

How much is your quality of life worth to City Hall?

Based on this video it looks like he is hiding in a bush next to the lake. Lets form a committee to decide who should go looking for it.

Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the meeting.

But has anybody asked City Hall why recycling pickup couldn't just be a different day than trash pickup?

Then, nobody has to move their cars.

Problem solved.

the utility of garbage collection in and of itself is "social engineering".

it has changed repeatedly in the last 120 years.

if it hadn't, people would still be dumping chamber pots out the window, and burning junk in yard.

ryan costa wrote:*** people would still be *** burning junk in yard.

You can't do that anymore?

Matthew John Markling wrote:From http://www.cleveland.com/lakewood/index.ssf/2013/04/post_24.html#incart_river:

Ward 3 Councilman Shawn Juris said:

At the end of the day, we're looking to change behaviors.

Matt

I really think you have missed the boat on this thread.

Social Engineering is the red herring. Or more to the point the left hand of the trickster.


trick·ster
[trik-ster]
noun
1. a deceiver; cheat; fraud.
2. a person who plays tricks.
3. a supernatural figure appearing in various guises and typically engaging in mischievous activities, important in the folklore and mythology of many primitive peoples and usually conceived as a culture hero.

In this case a combination of one and two, and far lower on the ladder of mythos than a
regular magician, though both often use the same sort of miss-direction.

"Social Engineering" is what the feeble minded would believe and then repeat to the
masses. I say this because this part of American archetype has already been put
selectively into our brains with the global need to recycle, and reuse, and save money and
the earth. This would be akin to the Flim-Flam man saying he will cause the sun to rise in
the east tomorrow.

But it is what they would tell, because "they" can't tell the truth like, "WE JUST RAISED
YOUR TAXES AGAIN."

For that is what they have done in the past and are doing now, simply raising our taxes.

When you get less for the same amount of money, the cost just went up. Any nitwit can
understand, If you got 16 ozs. of Potato Chips for $1.99, and now you get 12 ozs. the
price just went up. If we used to pay $5,000 a year in city taxes and we had our trashed
picked up in our backyards, and now we have to drag it to our front yards and back again,
our service has declined and our TAXES JUST WENT UP.

This is easy to figure, take your hourly rate, or what you would charge an hour, time
yourself in the act, and then figure in a little more for pain and suffering. So if you make
say $60 per hour, and it takes you 15 minutes to drag the can to the front yard, and
15 minutes to drag it back, your taxes went up $30 a week X 52 = $1,560.00.

But what about in the winter, what about when you slip and fall instead of the garbage
collector slips and falls? Well he has insurance through the city, do you? What about when
your neighbor stops you and talks for another 30 minutes? So a good case with insurance
and discomfort could be made for $45.00 a week if you make $60 an hour. $2,340 a year
more in tax value than 4 years ago.

So what we have is basically on the low end a $20,000,000 tax raise for the residents of
Lakewood. This we have been told will save the city $40,000 a year, or roughly $.080 a
resident! WHAT? WAIT? IS THAT CORRECT? Yes it is do the math your self...

It is easy...

What your hourly wage is _________ ÷ 60
X (the number of minutes it takes you to do, from the time you change your daily habit till when you get back to your daily habit)
X 52 (weeks)
= ?

Or $40,000 (savings) ÷ 50,000 (residents) = $0.80

This is madness disguised as "social engineering" from the tricksters.

If you are one of those that will now have to move their car to have the "trickster's"
so-called "social engineering" brought to your life multiple that number by 4!

So to recap, to SAVE Public Works and the City $40,000 a year, we are going to spend
$500,000 on new blue barrels, make people park blocks if not a ward away 1 day every
week, year round, and raise our taxes (cost to residents) $20,000,000 - $50,000,000
dollars a year!

Perhaps "The Trickster" should have stuck with closing our parks, and wishing our churches
were micro breweries. That was a less invasive form of JIHAD against the good residents of Lakewood.

ji·had
[ji-hahd] Show IPA
noun
1. a holy war undertaken as a sacred duty by Muslims.
2. any vigorous, emotional crusade for an idea or principle.

.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

Matthew John Markling wrote:From http://www.cleveland.com/lakewood/index.ssf/2013/04/post_24.html#incart_river:

Ward 3 Councilman Shawn Juris said:

At the end of the day, we're looking to change behaviors.

Matt

I really think you have missed the boat on this thread.

Social Engineering is the red herring. Or more to the point the left hand of the trickster.


trick·ster
[trik-ster]
noun
1. a deceiver; cheat; fraud.
2. a person who plays tricks.
3. a supernatural figure appearing in various guises and typically engaging in mischievous activities, important in the folklore and mythology of many primitive peoples and usually conceived as a culture hero.

In this case a combination of one and two, and far lower on the ladder of mythos than a
regular magician, though both often use the same sort of miss-direction.

"Social Engineering" is what the feeble minded would believe and then repeat to the
masses. I say this because this part of American archetype has already been put
selectively into our brains with the global need to recycle, and reuse, and save money and
the earth. This would be akin to the Flim-Flam man saying he will cause the sun to rise in
the east tomorrow.

But it is what they would tell, because "they" can't tell the truth like, "WE JUST RAISED
YOUR TAXES AGAIN."

For that is what they have done in the past and are doing now, simply raising our taxes.

When you get less for the same amount of money, the cost just went up. Any nitwit can
understand, If you got 16 ozs. of Potato Chips for $1.99, and now you get 12 ozs. the
price just went up. If we used to pay $5,000 a year in city taxes and we had our trashed
picked up in our backyards, and now we have to drag it to our front yards and back again,
our service has declined and our TAXES JUST WENT UP.

This is easy to figure, take your hourly rate, or what you would charge an hour, time
yourself in the act, and then figure in a little more for pain and suffering. So if you make
say $60 per hour, and it takes you 15 minutes to drag the can to the front yard, and
15 minutes to drag it back, your taxes went up $30 a week X 52 = $1,560.00.

But what about in the winter, what about when you slip and fall instead of the garbage
collector slips and falls? Well he has insurance through the city, do you? What about when
your neighbor stops you and talks for another 30 minutes? So a good case with insurance
and discomfort could be made for $45.00 a week if you make $60 an hour. $2,340 a year
more in tax value than 4 years ago.

So what we have is basically on the low end a $20,000,000 tax raise for the residents of
Lakewood. This we have been told will save the city $40,000 a year, or roughly $.080 a
resident! WHAT? WAIT? IS THAT CORRECT? Yes it is do the math your self...

It is easy...

What your hourly wage is _________ ÷ 60
X (the number of minutes it takes you to do, from the time you change your daily habit till when you get back to your daily habit)
X 52 (weeks)
= ?

Or $40,000 (savings) ÷ 50,000 (residents) = $0.80

This is madness disguised as "social engineering" from the tricksters.

If you are one of those that will now have to move their car to have the "trickster's"
so-called "social engineering" brought to your life multiple that number by 4!

So to recap, to SAVE Public Works and the City $40,000 a year, we are going to spend
$500,000 on new blue barrels, make people park blocks if not a ward away 1 day every
week, year round, and raise our taxes (cost to residents) $20,000,000 - $50,000,000
dollars a year!

Perhaps "The Trickster" should have stuck with closing our parks, and wishing our churches
were micro breweries. That was a less invasive form of JIHAD against the good residents of Lakewood.

ji·had
[ji-hahd] Show IPA
noun
1. a holy war undertaken as a sacred duty by Muslims.
2. any vigorous, emotional crusade for an idea or principle.

.

Jim, your math skills astound me! I didn’t think liberals could do math

The thing that continues to confound me is the City appears to be developing a history of shorting the resident. They can't figure out a way to pick up a trash can and a can of recyclables, so they propose a parking ban. They can't figure out how to stop graffiti, so they close the parks early. They don't like basketball hoops, so they don't fund them and when a group comes up with cash to fund them, the hoops have to be babysat. They can't afford benches for seniors to rest a bit or other quality of living improvements for residents but have $256,000 to spend on fancy light poles that benefit no one.

Back to the math thingy. The equation is not as straight forward as you put it. In the backyard trash pickup days, the City never collected trash from my backyard if there was a vehicle in the driveway. So in essence, there already was a parking ban in effect. It was an unwritten, but fully enforced, ban of parking in my driveway. Rather than move our cars into the street, I chose to take our trash to the curb every week. Most of the residents on our street took theirs to the curb and I'm sure there are many on other streets that did as well. It would be interesting to hear from the City on the percentage of residences where they actually went in the backyard to get the trash.

Way back in the day, there used to be people employed solely to push a button on an elevator. Building managers figured out that people could push elevator buttons themselves and they could save a few bucks by eliminating that job. I'm sure there were a few people who gripped about having to push a button themselves.

This is where the City came in with eliminating backyard trash pickup. It's a luxury that we can do without (and have done so). It saved huge dollars on wages because it takes less people to do the job and medical expenses due to less injuries on the job. Also if I remember correctly, at the time the City needed to purchase new trash trucks so it was zero sum...except for the bins.

It only seems natural to extend this to recycling. We put out a couple small grocery bags of recyclables every week and paper every two weeks. With the size of the recycle bins, we'll probably put it all out once a month. That will save me a few trips to the curb.

[quote="Charlie PageIt only seems natural to extend this to recycling. We put out a couple small grocery bags of recyclables every week and paper every two weeks. With the size of the recycle bins, wel'll probably put it all out once a month. That will save me a few trips to the curb.[/quote]

Would it make sense to collect the trash every two weeks, one week for trash and one week for recyclables?

Bill Call wrote:[quote="Charlie PageIt only seems natural to extend this to recycling. We put out a couple small grocery bags of recyclables every week and paper every two weeks. With the size of the recycle bins, wel'll probably put it all out once a month. That will save me a few trips to the curb.

Would it make sense to collect the trash every two weeks, one week for trash and one week for recyclables?[/quote]


Charlie

We are not talking about pushing buttons in a box to get where we all are going. We are
talking about another massive cut to our services, and the unloading yet once again on to
the residents, so that the city can support businesses over residents. A constant theme
over the past 6 years.

Bill

While you have come up with a common sense approach that I am sure has never even
be considered by council, it does have some drawbacks, especially in the summer. Drive
around and check out tree lawns on collection day. 60% of the cans are filled and over
flowing. To have this in a backyard while being boarded on two sides by water which make
rats and other vermin a constant.

It does seem to me that public works seems to have a real problem keeping themselves
solvent for lack of a better word. Who heads up that committee? Do they have any real
world experience in business or public works? OR Social engineering for that matter!

.

Once again, I fail to understand why garbage and recycling can't be picked up on different days of the week.

Why does it HAVE to be done on the same day?

No parking ban. Problem solved.

Matthew Lee wrote:Once again, I fail to understand why garbage and recycling can't be picked up on different days of the week.

Why does it HAVE to be done on the same day?

No parking ban. Problem solved.

Matthew

I am willing to bet the argument would be, they do not have enough staff to do that. Part
of the massive savings we would benefit from the "new trash service of bringing trash to
our tree lawns, was based solely on retirements in the works over the following five years.
It was my understanding that this was really the only savings in the entire project.

It would seem that some of the same wording is being used here, with projected savings
in retirements downstream. So if you have a skeletal staff barely getting by as they
scream of one minor cost saving ($40,000) to the next has to mean we are at bare
minimum staffing. Which can only mean some are getting overtime now and then.

I always found it amusing that "the city" bought into the idea that 15,000 new garbage
cans and brand new state of the art trucks were going to somehow save us money? In
fact they did not, it was retirements that saved us money.

Now one of the wonderful things about retirements, is it allows you to dump a full
benefited highly paid staff member for one on the other end of the spectrum, low cost,
and low benefits. So that much of the savings would have been realized with the old
equipment.

FWIW

.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:Part of the massive savings we would benefit from the "new trash service of bringing trash to
our tree lawns, was based solely on retirements in the works over the following five years.
It was my understanding that this was really the only savings in the entire project.

It would seem that some of the same wording is being used here, with projected savings
in retirements downstream. So if you have a skeletal staff barely getting by as they
scream of one minor cost saving ($40,000) to the next has to mean we are at bare
minimum staffing. Which can only mean some are getting overtime now and then.

I always found it amusing that "the city" bought into the idea that 15,000 new garbage
cans and brand new state of the art trucks were going to somehow save us money? In
fact they did not, it was retirements that saved us money.

Now one of the wonderful things about retirements, is it allows you to dump a full
benefited highly paid staff member for one on the other end of the spectrum, low cost,
and low benefits. So that much of the savings would have been realized with the old
equipment.

FWIW

.

Jim - In 2008, the department of Refuse and Recycling's actual spend was $4,486,000 with 43 employees. By contrast, in 2012 that department spent $2,897,000 and had 30 employees. So over the course of 4 years, the City reduced the cost by $1,589,000 and 13 people, with much of that coming in 2009 and 2010.

All the numbers above come from the City's financials. It's not BS. It's not replacing high cost people at the end of their career with low cost early career people. It's all from automating trash collection. Fewer people required to do the job and fewer injuries from not manually lifting an average of 63 tons of trash per day.

I have a friend that works for the City. Every now and then he has to fill in on trash duty. He hates trash duty. He tells me everyone hates trash duty. As soon as people get seniority they look to bump someone in another department. Unless you like trash, there are very few people who retire from Refuse and Recycling.