The Observation Deck

I moved this from the other thread:

Doesn't this bother anyone else?

"The mayors of Lakewood, Parma Heights and South Euclid say they are ready to merge their cities with neighbors, though none has sealed a deal."

What does this mean?? Have we really determined that we're ready to merge? What kind of committment is Lakewood making? What will the government look like? Am I going to be stuck with 21 council reps like Cleveland? Ken Warren asked some very pointed questions and never received an answer.

Suzanne Metelko wrote:I moved this from the other thread:

Doesn't this bother anyone else?

"The mayors of Lakewood, Parma Heights and South Euclid say they are ready to merge their cities with neighbors, though none has sealed a deal."

What does this mean?? Have we really determined that we're ready to merge? What kind of committment is Lakewood making? What will the government look like? Am I going to be stuck with 21 council reps like Cleveland? Ken Warren asked some very pointed questions and never received an answer.

Suzanne

Where does Ryan stand on regionalism?

Was council asked about any of this?

Where does Ed Fitzgerald stand on this?

Neither bothered to answer the original question.

I called city hall to see what the answer was from the mayor and found out the mayor is on a planned vacation until the end of next week.

So while we wait for an explanation from the mayor on the planning issue maybe we could hear from Ryan and Ed, on their thoughts on regionalism, and if they are part of this planning.

I am working on a story about exactly what the Mayor is talking about and quoted on for an upcoming Observer. This is a very serious topic with me.

Thanks for breaking the thread into two areas.


.

Hi,
The silence from our elected officials on this (other than our current Mayor who is eager to give up his powers to others) is quite alarming.

Does the Mayor need Council's support to do this?

If the Mayor gets Council support to do this, does he and Council need to present this to the voters?

Days ago I asked my, usually responsive Councilman, these questions with no response.

Lakewood is hanging on the abyss and all our representatives are silent.

Is something in the works?

The Plain Dealer article was the first I've heard any elected official in Lakewood discuss "merging." I don't believe the Mayor meant eliminating boundaries and merging with another city, if that's what Suzanne means. I have never participated in any discussion of this, and I suspect neither have my colleagues on Council, although I don't want to speak for them.

Hope that info helps settle the discussion. Don, sorry for the tardy response; please read nothing into it.

Kevin Butler
(Ward 1 Council)

At a neighborhood meeting tonight, Ryan was asked about regionalization. To paraphase, "sharing swat teams is one thing, but I'm not going to agree to hand over Lakewood and all that is unique here. I'm not in favor of giving up our name or our goverment autonomy. I'm not in favor of government merger."

We'll be adding that message and a broader position statement regarding regionalization to the website this week.

ryandemro.com

Councilman Butler is correct, there certainly has never been any discussion of this in any City Council meeting.

If the mayor was misquoted, he should ask for a retraction.

Ed FitzGerald wrote:Councilman Butler is correct, there certainly has never been any discussion of this in any City Council meeting.

If the mayor was misquoted, he should ask for a retraction.

Ed/Kevin

Thanks for the comments.

Thanks for jumping in.

I have asked the mayor's office for a clarification post from Mayor George.

Word was the mayor is out of town.

Do either of you have any postion on regionalism, or regionally thinking, or not for us? I know it is a complex issue but it does figure into many of the discussions we are currently having.

Thanks again to both for joining the discussion.


.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:Do either of you have any postion on regionalism, or regionally thinking, or not for us? I know it is a complex issue but it does figure into many of the discussions we are currently having.

It hasn't figured into any discussions we've had at city hall, unless you mean bulk purchasing, combined SWAT, the administration's recent Cleveland-Lakewood enterprise zone deal (trading steady water rates for a non-poaching agreement) and similar economic initiatives. As I recall, Ed FitzGerald has discussed attracting other communities to co-manage or rent Winterhurst in an effort to balance its books, which is a good example of smart "regional thinking."

I have no trouble supporting efforts like these to save the city money by eliminating only nominal boundaries between communities. Never having been presented with any other salient "regional" ideas, however, I have no official position on what we're loosely calling regionalism. I'm not a Voices and Choices board member, to put it plainly; yet neither have I turned a deaf ear to innovative ideas, provided they make sense for us.

Councilman Butler:

From the policy and propaganda perspectives that are informing local insider consciousness on matters of merger, consolidation and regionalization, I suggest your attention to several institutions and their agents will provide a sense of the discourse – from slippery slope to end-game.

City County Consolidation

Gamaliel Foundation and David Rusk

http://www.gamaliel.org/DavidRusk/DavidRuskLibrary.htm

NOAH, a local affiliate:

http://www.ci.rochester.ny.us/index.cfm?id=588

Merger of Municipalities

Brookings has been pushing the merger of municipalities. Here's one Powerpoint to give you an idea of the considerations.

http://www.richmondheights.org/DocumentView.asp?DID=26

Equity and Regionalism

Policylink, Kirwin Institute and john powell
http://www.policylink.org/Communities/C ... ay2007.pdf

http://www.ci.rochester.ny.us/index.cfm?id=588

http://www.sustainablepittsburgh.org/3E ... Links.html

There plenty more, but this should give you some orientation to the discourse informing and converging around Sam Miller, the Mayor of Hudson, the wizards at Levin College of Urban Affairs, and the scribes from the PD.

That’s the deep context in which one must consider and measure the Mayor’s quote.

Whether one likes the idea or not, it’s critical to realize the issues, interests and methods used to frame mass consciousness.

Dig in and figure it out for yourself.

The above are proponents. Perhaps you will find the arguments persuasive.

Kenneth Warren

Kevin,

I think it was Mike Dever who has been in discussion with Mike Dolan and others about cooperation around the rink. The Winterhurst Task Force evolved out of those discussions and others taking place in the Public Works Committe of City Council.

Frankly, I wouldn't describe the conversations with Cleveland regarding sharing the costs of Winterhurst as serious, unfortunately. It is something I spoke with Cleveland officials about and have suggested must be explored in the last three budget processes, including when the Winterhurst Task Force made their presentation to City Council. If someone else would like to actually get something done on that issue, they are certainly welcome to take all the credit.

As I pointed out in budget hearings, Winterhurst already IS a regional facility. It draws its clientele from all over Northeast Ohio, including Bay Village and Rocky River. But, it's financing mechanism is strictly local. It's just one example of a service which we value, but which is getting difficult to afford on our own. The new Councilman for the West Park area is Marty Keane, who is a former colleague of mine in the County Prosecutor's office and is a good man. He also happens to be a former Lakewood resident (on Parkwood). I have a call in to him on this subject, and perhaps we can re-start discussions in earnest.

This is just one piece of the larger issue- I'll try to expand on it later. I would say that when we are ineffective in sharing costs for services and facilities, it lends weight to outsiders who argue that we must merge to achieve efficiencies.

Ed FitzGerald wrote:This is just one piece of the larger issue- I'll try to expand on it later. I would say that when we are ineffective in sharing costs for services and facilities, it lends weight to outsiders who argue that we must merge to achieve efficiencies.

Ed

This is truly something Lakewood needs to look at and get tougher on. Inside and outside the city. While we have Winterhurst, the dog park, library etc that draw from all over, and needs evaluations.

There is items like St. Ed's using Kaufman Park for free.

If we are tightening belts, it is nice knowing how much is being considered.

The balance of course is what do we lose in our effort to equalize cost.

Look forward to your expanded notes.

.

And Don's question has a lot of merit. How much can the Mayor do without a vote of council and how much can council do without a vote of the people?

Obviously few people are against buying cooperatively which we are already doing.

I'd like to know more about the Winterhurst proposal. I was involved in getting it changed to city management and keeping it from private management. I thought one of the concepts was to sell more ads - ads on the boards and to increase charges to non Lakewood residents - including Hockey teams proportionately for ice time based on the number of Lakewood residents. (Maybe that should be a separate thread.

Thanks Kevin, Ed and Ryan for responding.

Lynn

They are selling ads.

Believe me they are selling ads.


.

My suspicion why they want to regionalize this great asset has to be the cost. Energy costs have gone through the roof and one of the highest users of energy that the city has (outside of the sewer plant) is Winterhurt.

With our govenor, senator, representative and state rep all environmentalists, could we perhaps get some grants to change Winterhurt into using a renewable form of energy? Big flat roof with few trees works well with solar - we just had a solar convention here in NE Ohio. I spoke with a gentleman in Lakewood that just converted his home to geo thermal. Or municipal windpower - which may be the best - but is the longest period to wait.

This would be both an exciting experiment for Lakewood and put us on the map as a city that cares about sustainability and at the same time lower the energy costs which may be the biggest cost factor in running Winterhurt.

Any ideas?