Half way through City Council's legislative year!
Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 11:58 am
Back in April, I attended City Council's special Legislative & Strategic Planning meeting (officially a meeting of The Committee of the Whole). I believe this special meeting is a relatively new idea--perhaps just its second or third year (but don't quote me on that). It's a great idea ... but I am concerned that such a meeting would take place more than 1/4 of the way into the year. Yes, I realize they were trying to accommodate Councilwoman Smith's being "in the family way" ... but it could have (and in my opinion, should have) been done in January.)
Since the City's Fiscal Year also coincides with the calendar year, June 30 marked the half-way point of Council's legislative efforts. Here are the minutes of that meeting.
Questions?? Comments?? Concerns??
Do you feel that Council has effectively used this Plan over the first six months of the FY?
MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
HELD AT THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON-LAKEWOOD
APRIL 13, 2013
9:30 a.m.
1415 WARREN ROAD
LAKEWOOD, OHIO 44107
Present: Councilmembers David Anderson, Thomas R. Bullock III, Shawn Juris, Mary Louise Madigan, Ryan Nowlin, Brian Powers, Monique Smith.
Also Present: Peter Grossetti; M. Hagan recording minutes
Chairman Powers opens meeting at 9:40 a.m. and indicates discussion would be Legislative Planning; Strategic Planning. He stated he would like to go around the table and ask individual Councilmembers the issues they deemed a priority:
There are several issues provided including the following:
Upgrade of commercial corridor and neighborhoods, role Council has in relation to the Administration.
A question of Council’s role in addressing City issues in non-legislative ways – such as day to day quality of life issues. An example was the role Council could have in marketing Lakewood.
Chairman Powers indicated that his suggestion would be a preliminary discussion before legislative priorities are addressed such as right/wrong role of Council and quality of life issues.
There was discussion of importance of Administration/Council open communication.
The question was raised as to how Councilmembers felt about the city and how they perceived what residents felt about the city.
There was an indicated that citizens were feeling good. That Councilmembers were feeling good, in that the Housing Forward initiative was a positive step to make a goal of identifying housing issues in 12-16 months. It was indicated that that lots of progress was being made and that the City was on the right course with Housing.
There was a discussion as to police data being provided; recognizing police response and arrest rates were considered by many as good and the desirability to promote that data reflecting that.
There was consensus that Departments seemed to be responsive to Councilmembers and residents.
There was a reference to past Budget Hearing procedure regarding Council’s Checks and Balances role.
Chairman Powers asked how the practice of separate reviews with Committees matched to Departments/divisions was working.
There was consensus that a meeting to be updated on Safety Forces statistics would be beneficial.
There was suggestions about the helpfulness of receiving annual crime stats, and the ability to talk in Committee with the Police Chief.
A reference was made that good information could be gleaned from information Judge Carroll provides to Council.
It was concluded that a meeting on public safety would be had in a Committee of the Whole meeting as opposed to just a Public Safety Committee.
A goal stated was to determine what could be myths & misconceptions of crimes. It was discussed that a review of expectations may be worthwhile and how that would most likely touch upon the marketing of Lakewood too.
The importance of speaking same language regarding safety, to ensure that good information was filling any void if there was a void.
It was also indicated that beyond statistics there was a prevention component regarding the City’s reaction to serious crime incidents that was considered worthy of addressing. An example was provided regarding the Waterbury shooting/ SWAT incident. There was a question as to if it would be helpful to provide a public response to the community, identify what happened, what was in place already and what may need to be in place to prevent future incidents.
The occurrence of serious crimes in other suburbs (indication of recent Westlake incident) was brought up. It was stated that an approach should not sugar coat/be Pollyannaish about an incident but also to be cautious not to be reactionary.
• It was discussed to have a frank discussion and review of if things are things are better or worse, with reflection on the following factors:
• Population and comparisons to other suburbs.
• Number of police officers (95 police officers) that could be a tendency to find a lot more crime.
• The way Lakewood collects and evaluates its crime statistic (considered by other safety forces to be more rigidly defined) .
• Police quick response time and close case rates.
• Crime prevention and support of robust block clubs and entertaining new non-legislative initiatives.
• How to publicize successful safety initiatives. It was indicated that many could not be measured easily.
• There was an interest expressed in police engagement procedures and approaches (relative to variables in addressing calls such as nuisance calls)
• Interest was expressed in learning more of the procedures undertaken during an investigation.
It was stated that a discussion with the Chiefs and Captains would be pursued.
The Chair affirmed that the Lakewood Police Department was considered the best of the best in their approach to enforcement, response time, public service, and was considered highly regarded. He indicated that the respect and admiration Chief Malley garners was widely known.
There was a suggestion to review the past practice of interviewing City employees (Police/Fire chiefs – Public works as examples) on Local Access T.V. – to inform public about budget, law enforcement/ issues such as perception and reality regarding public safety. It was suggested that as the positive result of past public engagement was the creation of community policing under former Mayor FitzGerald.
It was stated that public safety and quality of life issues were intertwined.
Reference was made that during layoffs the number of police remained steady – and that four were even added.
The issues of mental health/Child welfare were stated as integral to the quality of life/public safety issues of a City.
There was further indication that public safety as far as perception/reality of feeling safe, marketing, citizens awareness of police initiatives could be a topic to last very very long.
Initiatives such as increased internal communication across departments/police, Law, etc. - with Sharepoint and Block Clubs were stated as essential to safety.
An indication that research of other cities crime prevention measures would be undertaken (Council staff? Councilmembers? ) especially checking on coordination between departments;
It was indicated that many of the issues were part of the Community Vision to include a multi-disciplinary approach between Fire, Police, social services, and housing enforcement.
There was a suggestion that the Community Relations Advisory Cmte and other groups could be resources to promote initiatives . Help could be gained from various groups for marketing, block clubs, quality of life, neighbors getting along with one another, etc.
There was general discussion regarding the continued collaboration between schools, social services network, LCSE, mental health, LCRAC – County, Hospital – (groups referenced in Human Services Summit).
The role of Council in its oversight function was discussed, how to relay expectations to Administration regarding various issues. Sidewalks and how to better enforce compliance. The three zone approach the Public Works Director indicates was briefly discussed.
Specifically for sidewalks the following was noted in procedure:
citation, response, bonding.
There was a discussion as to if it would be necessary to publicize the sidewalk replacement procedure more, if it would be part of a community relations, marketing asset.
In regards to sidewalks there was lengthy discussion and regarding strategy and capacity. It was stated that the variables were not only technical – variables such as ramping/leveling, sandstone, end use, replace.
A question was asked if the City had a role in acknowledging use of their own experienced vendors?
It was further discussed the possibility of paring together walkable/commercial/churches/schools, for 60 + year olds to kids.
Regarding sidewalks insurance, liability issues, were mentioned. It was indicated there were limited ordinances that relate to sidewalks.
There was a suggestion to initiate a certification/seal/decal - program to show a particular street was a walkable one.
An added bonus would be that remaining streets (with poor sidewalks) could be identified as areas of concern.
Chairman Powers referenced the efforts Mr. Bullock and Mr. Juris have made in addressing sidewalks issues and they indicated they would continue to keep on the issue.
Ms. Madigan indicated special attention would be Cove & 117th; Lake Avenue.
A question was made regarding housing inspector duties and why sidewalks were considered separate. A look into liability, resources with the Law Director would be requested.
A question was asked if the sidewalk condition may be at a crisis level. There was a question as to if special training in sidewalks was required, as to what is defined as a hazard.
Procedures to ensure better compliance was discussed.
Marketing & Community Relations was discussed. There was comment made as to how the City addressed positives in investment , economic development, as well as McDonalds/Drug Mart development that create some negative feedback.
It was acknowledged that factual information was routinely delivered through press releases and an interest expanding that with more creative initiatives – to show assets like that Lakewood is shopping destination. Plantation Home, Paisley were higher end shops that were stated as shops that could be promoted.
There was an indication that in addition to great housing, neighborhoods, schools, the eclectic, engaged and “quirky” feel of Lakewood could be marketed.
An example was provided regarding Austin, Texas; “Keep Austin Weird”.
The suggestion of securing creative professionals for Lakewood was made. There were suggestions of re-developing a logo.
There was a consensus that Lakewood was attracting young people – and the reputation for being cool, funky, along with retro attributes combined with bikability was making a positive impact. It was suggested that there were few young professionals in past that considered Lakewood as a place to move to and that this has since completely changed.
It was decided that before there would be a vote to allocate dollars work would be done to determine what would be accomplished as there are a lot of creative people in Lakewood.
A brainstorm session was had with the following Legislative Priorities marked on a flip chart. Each Councilmember would check off top priorities. The result was as follows:
• Expand Housing Department Staff
• Council-Initiated Project List (1)
• Deliberate on Community Vision (1)
• Re-invigorate Housing rehab Industry(1)
• Roof Permits Review (1)
• Proactive Sign Compliance ARB Expiration dates
• Reduce or eliminate bulk trash pick up (1)
• Use Committee Structure judiciously (3)
• Sidewalks (5)
• Structurally Balanced Budget (3)
• Traffic Calming(2)
• Parks Ambassador (1)
It was acknowledged that there could be priorities that are not presently up there and that work through committees and engaging community could present other priories to ensure they match the community’s priorities.
There was a discussion as to the perception and reality of council jobs. Indication that it went beyond simply passing the budget, but responding to resident calls/concerns. This included separation of powers, branches of government, avoiding “seven mini-mayors”.
The Administration’s program SharePoint could help – with the Lean initiative – to keep Council aware of how the Administration is performing and tap into cross-referenced data.
Meeting adjourned by President Powers at 11:57 a.m.
Since the City's Fiscal Year also coincides with the calendar year, June 30 marked the half-way point of Council's legislative efforts. Here are the minutes of that meeting.
Questions?? Comments?? Concerns??
Do you feel that Council has effectively used this Plan over the first six months of the FY?
MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
HELD AT THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON-LAKEWOOD
APRIL 13, 2013
9:30 a.m.
1415 WARREN ROAD
LAKEWOOD, OHIO 44107
Present: Councilmembers David Anderson, Thomas R. Bullock III, Shawn Juris, Mary Louise Madigan, Ryan Nowlin, Brian Powers, Monique Smith.
Also Present: Peter Grossetti; M. Hagan recording minutes
Chairman Powers opens meeting at 9:40 a.m. and indicates discussion would be Legislative Planning; Strategic Planning. He stated he would like to go around the table and ask individual Councilmembers the issues they deemed a priority:
There are several issues provided including the following:
Upgrade of commercial corridor and neighborhoods, role Council has in relation to the Administration.
A question of Council’s role in addressing City issues in non-legislative ways – such as day to day quality of life issues. An example was the role Council could have in marketing Lakewood.
Chairman Powers indicated that his suggestion would be a preliminary discussion before legislative priorities are addressed such as right/wrong role of Council and quality of life issues.
There was discussion of importance of Administration/Council open communication.
The question was raised as to how Councilmembers felt about the city and how they perceived what residents felt about the city.
There was an indicated that citizens were feeling good. That Councilmembers were feeling good, in that the Housing Forward initiative was a positive step to make a goal of identifying housing issues in 12-16 months. It was indicated that that lots of progress was being made and that the City was on the right course with Housing.
There was a discussion as to police data being provided; recognizing police response and arrest rates were considered by many as good and the desirability to promote that data reflecting that.
There was consensus that Departments seemed to be responsive to Councilmembers and residents.
There was a reference to past Budget Hearing procedure regarding Council’s Checks and Balances role.
Chairman Powers asked how the practice of separate reviews with Committees matched to Departments/divisions was working.
There was consensus that a meeting to be updated on Safety Forces statistics would be beneficial.
There was suggestions about the helpfulness of receiving annual crime stats, and the ability to talk in Committee with the Police Chief.
A reference was made that good information could be gleaned from information Judge Carroll provides to Council.
It was concluded that a meeting on public safety would be had in a Committee of the Whole meeting as opposed to just a Public Safety Committee.
A goal stated was to determine what could be myths & misconceptions of crimes. It was discussed that a review of expectations may be worthwhile and how that would most likely touch upon the marketing of Lakewood too.
The importance of speaking same language regarding safety, to ensure that good information was filling any void if there was a void.
It was also indicated that beyond statistics there was a prevention component regarding the City’s reaction to serious crime incidents that was considered worthy of addressing. An example was provided regarding the Waterbury shooting/ SWAT incident. There was a question as to if it would be helpful to provide a public response to the community, identify what happened, what was in place already and what may need to be in place to prevent future incidents.
The occurrence of serious crimes in other suburbs (indication of recent Westlake incident) was brought up. It was stated that an approach should not sugar coat/be Pollyannaish about an incident but also to be cautious not to be reactionary.
• It was discussed to have a frank discussion and review of if things are things are better or worse, with reflection on the following factors:
• Population and comparisons to other suburbs.
• Number of police officers (95 police officers) that could be a tendency to find a lot more crime.
• The way Lakewood collects and evaluates its crime statistic (considered by other safety forces to be more rigidly defined) .
• Police quick response time and close case rates.
• Crime prevention and support of robust block clubs and entertaining new non-legislative initiatives.
• How to publicize successful safety initiatives. It was indicated that many could not be measured easily.
• There was an interest expressed in police engagement procedures and approaches (relative to variables in addressing calls such as nuisance calls)
• Interest was expressed in learning more of the procedures undertaken during an investigation.
It was stated that a discussion with the Chiefs and Captains would be pursued.
The Chair affirmed that the Lakewood Police Department was considered the best of the best in their approach to enforcement, response time, public service, and was considered highly regarded. He indicated that the respect and admiration Chief Malley garners was widely known.
There was a suggestion to review the past practice of interviewing City employees (Police/Fire chiefs – Public works as examples) on Local Access T.V. – to inform public about budget, law enforcement/ issues such as perception and reality regarding public safety. It was suggested that as the positive result of past public engagement was the creation of community policing under former Mayor FitzGerald.
It was stated that public safety and quality of life issues were intertwined.
Reference was made that during layoffs the number of police remained steady – and that four were even added.
The issues of mental health/Child welfare were stated as integral to the quality of life/public safety issues of a City.
There was further indication that public safety as far as perception/reality of feeling safe, marketing, citizens awareness of police initiatives could be a topic to last very very long.
Initiatives such as increased internal communication across departments/police, Law, etc. - with Sharepoint and Block Clubs were stated as essential to safety.
An indication that research of other cities crime prevention measures would be undertaken (Council staff? Councilmembers? ) especially checking on coordination between departments;
It was indicated that many of the issues were part of the Community Vision to include a multi-disciplinary approach between Fire, Police, social services, and housing enforcement.
There was a suggestion that the Community Relations Advisory Cmte and other groups could be resources to promote initiatives . Help could be gained from various groups for marketing, block clubs, quality of life, neighbors getting along with one another, etc.
There was general discussion regarding the continued collaboration between schools, social services network, LCSE, mental health, LCRAC – County, Hospital – (groups referenced in Human Services Summit).
The role of Council in its oversight function was discussed, how to relay expectations to Administration regarding various issues. Sidewalks and how to better enforce compliance. The three zone approach the Public Works Director indicates was briefly discussed.
Specifically for sidewalks the following was noted in procedure:
citation, response, bonding.
There was a discussion as to if it would be necessary to publicize the sidewalk replacement procedure more, if it would be part of a community relations, marketing asset.
In regards to sidewalks there was lengthy discussion and regarding strategy and capacity. It was stated that the variables were not only technical – variables such as ramping/leveling, sandstone, end use, replace.
A question was asked if the City had a role in acknowledging use of their own experienced vendors?
It was further discussed the possibility of paring together walkable/commercial/churches/schools, for 60 + year olds to kids.
Regarding sidewalks insurance, liability issues, were mentioned. It was indicated there were limited ordinances that relate to sidewalks.
There was a suggestion to initiate a certification/seal/decal - program to show a particular street was a walkable one.
An added bonus would be that remaining streets (with poor sidewalks) could be identified as areas of concern.
Chairman Powers referenced the efforts Mr. Bullock and Mr. Juris have made in addressing sidewalks issues and they indicated they would continue to keep on the issue.
Ms. Madigan indicated special attention would be Cove & 117th; Lake Avenue.
A question was made regarding housing inspector duties and why sidewalks were considered separate. A look into liability, resources with the Law Director would be requested.
A question was asked if the sidewalk condition may be at a crisis level. There was a question as to if special training in sidewalks was required, as to what is defined as a hazard.
Procedures to ensure better compliance was discussed.
Marketing & Community Relations was discussed. There was comment made as to how the City addressed positives in investment , economic development, as well as McDonalds/Drug Mart development that create some negative feedback.
It was acknowledged that factual information was routinely delivered through press releases and an interest expanding that with more creative initiatives – to show assets like that Lakewood is shopping destination. Plantation Home, Paisley were higher end shops that were stated as shops that could be promoted.
There was an indication that in addition to great housing, neighborhoods, schools, the eclectic, engaged and “quirky” feel of Lakewood could be marketed.
An example was provided regarding Austin, Texas; “Keep Austin Weird”.
The suggestion of securing creative professionals for Lakewood was made. There were suggestions of re-developing a logo.
There was a consensus that Lakewood was attracting young people – and the reputation for being cool, funky, along with retro attributes combined with bikability was making a positive impact. It was suggested that there were few young professionals in past that considered Lakewood as a place to move to and that this has since completely changed.
It was decided that before there would be a vote to allocate dollars work would be done to determine what would be accomplished as there are a lot of creative people in Lakewood.
A brainstorm session was had with the following Legislative Priorities marked on a flip chart. Each Councilmember would check off top priorities. The result was as follows:
• Expand Housing Department Staff
• Council-Initiated Project List (1)
• Deliberate on Community Vision (1)
• Re-invigorate Housing rehab Industry(1)
• Roof Permits Review (1)
• Proactive Sign Compliance ARB Expiration dates
• Reduce or eliminate bulk trash pick up (1)
• Use Committee Structure judiciously (3)
• Sidewalks (5)
• Structurally Balanced Budget (3)
• Traffic Calming(2)
• Parks Ambassador (1)
It was acknowledged that there could be priorities that are not presently up there and that work through committees and engaging community could present other priories to ensure they match the community’s priorities.
There was a discussion as to the perception and reality of council jobs. Indication that it went beyond simply passing the budget, but responding to resident calls/concerns. This included separation of powers, branches of government, avoiding “seven mini-mayors”.
The Administration’s program SharePoint could help – with the Lean initiative – to keep Council aware of how the Administration is performing and tap into cross-referenced data.
Meeting adjourned by President Powers at 11:57 a.m.