The Observation Deck

In Demro's response to the debate questions he refutes the questioners statement about crime stats not being on the increase.

If Demro believes crime is on the increase, show us the stats.

I have looked at our statistics, crime is not on the rise in Lakewood.

In addition, the perception of Section 8 residents causing an increase in crime. Demro - show me the stats. I believe that there aren't any.

Yes our city has many problems, what city doesn't, but an increase in crime, or crime due to our Section 8 population is not a fact. Just an assumptiion, an attempt create a platform through fear mongering.

sharon kinsella wrote: In addition, the perception of Section 8 residents causing an increase in crime. Demro - show me the stats. I believe that there aren't any.

Ryan didn't say Section 8 was causing more crime. What he said is he would work with CMHA to get rid of those Section 8 people who do commit crimes.

I mean I could have missed it, but do you have a direct quote from Ryan backing up what you're claiming he said?

Here's the direct quote from his written response:

Ryan Demro wrote:Reduce the burden of problem Section 8 tenants by reporting them to CMHA

I see no problem with reporting problem section 8 tenants to CMHA.

Maybe he didn't directly say that but putting that into his answer was an attempt to hook up the Section 8 residents with crime.

Semantics are a slippery slope. Perceptions can be maneuvered. I'm tired of people fear mongering and blaming Section 8, thugs and hoodlums and feeling that they are going to get away with it.

Until I see facts that Section 8 residents are causing crime, I would like a moratorium called on linking these issues up semantically.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Mr. Demro didn't answer the question posed by Thomas Mulready:

MULREADY:* As Mayor, how do you plan to deal with Lakewood's transitory role in the flow of populations leaving the inner city, entering Lakewood, and flowing out to the outer ring? Please comment on Section 8 housing, absentee landlords, the unavailability of new construction homes, the lack of retail, street parking shortages.

Ryan, can you please clarify?

sharon kinsella wrote:Maybe he didn't directly say that but putting that into his answer was an attempt to hook up the Section 8 residents with crime.

Semantics are a slippery slope. Perceptions can be maneuvered. I'm tired of people fear mongering and blaming Section 8, thugs and hoodlums and feeling that they are going to get away with it.

Until I see facts that Section 8 residents are causing crime, I would like a moratorium called on linking these issues up semantically.

I think you're honestly reading into something that's not even there. There's no fear mongering, no blame, no saying Section 8=hoodlums.

He was answering a direct question with a very realistic and completely appropriate answer. I'm glad he'll report problem Section 8 tenants to CMHA...Mayor George should be doing that if he isn't already. I'm sure Ed FitzGerald would do the same thing based on what I've heard at the debate.

Do we have any statistics from the city on this subject??

from another thread (clicky)

Regarding Section 8 and crime:

Under the agreement that was signed between Mayor George and CMHA in March of 2006, the city has a responsibility to document criminal activity which occurs at subsidized housing sites, and is then to report that information to CMHA. CMHA can then take action against the tenants.

At one of our Public Safety meetings last month, I asked both the police chief and the law director how this provision of the agreement was being enforced. Both were unaware that it existed, despite the fact that Mayor George, as Public Safety Director, put out a press release regarding it in March of 2006.

Last week, I received a call from a patrolman who is a friend of mine. The patrol officers just received a copy of all of the CMHA properties, and now can start cross-checking arrests against these addresses.

After 18 months of inexplicable delay, now we should get some data about Section 8 and crime, instead of leaving it to the imagination. We should also start getting any offenders who do reside in Section 8 evicted, as other suburbs have been doing for years. If we actually start enforcing this agreement, we won't have to have a discussion where no one has actual hard data about any link between Section 8 and crime.
_________________
Ed FitzGerald
Lakewood City Councilman, At-Large

Bryan -

I don't know how to do the quote box but I can cut and paste.

From the Q&A -

????: According to the stats on your web site, crime in Lakewood is
not up significantly, yet you have made it one of the key planks in
your platform. Why?

DEMRO: I disagree with your statement. Crime is up significantly. I intend to address it aggressively by using best practices from around the nation that have brought proven results to cities that have implemented them. These include:

Zero-tolerance policing, restoring control of neighborhoods to law-abiding residents

Reduce the burden of problem Section 8 tenants by reporting them to CMHA

Utilize real-time statistics to prevent crime waves

Implement neighborhood policing and expand the Block Club program

Now - can you explain to me how he made that separate and away from the crime stats except for a new paragraph. This was part of his answer about crime.

And it would be nice if Demro would answer this, I know he's capable of answering questions.

Sharon,

I would encourage you and any one else who has questions for Councilman Demro to contact him directly by phone or email. Or if, like Councilman Demro, you prefer a more public forum, please plan to attend any of the four public town hall meetings we have scheduled in the next two weeks. Monday evening Councilman Demro will be at Harding Middle School. We hope to see you there. Face to face is really a valuable way to exchange information. You know who's asking the question and you know who's answering it.

We also plan to have last week's live debate online for viewing early this week.

As for the crime statistics, I was at the safety meeting when the Police Chief announced the dramatic rise. Those are the administration's numbers. Mr. Fitzgerald, and several members of the LO staff were also there. If you're looking for an answer - the mayor will need to explain it, it was his employee who reported it.

Suzanne Metelko

from neopolitics.com (clicky here)

Ryan is currently investigating the correlation between the Section 8 voucher list and crime.

This is what I found

Suzanne -

I do appreciate your thoughts, however, I would like the answer in writing.

The statement was made in writing.

I'm not going to sit through a slash fest. I'm not interested in cutting remarks about the current administration. I'm not interested in verbal manipulation.

I want it in writing.

Frankly, I think the safety meetings were a waste of time, that is why I didn't go. I think we have much more pressing issues.

Economic decline, environmental issues, economic development, citizen interaction, recreational facilities and youth empowerment.

When I see these things are going to be addressed, when I feel it's a venue that's inclusive, I will go.

The statistics are even on Ryan's web page.

I'm not going to get into verbal fisticuffs over this.

I'm not going to sit and listen to mudslinging. I want it in writing.

sharon kinsella wrote:Suzanne -

I'm not going to sit through a slash fest. I'm not interested in cutting remarks about the current administration. I'm not interested in verbal manipulation.

Frankly, I think the safety meetings were a waste of time, that is why I didn't go. I think we have much more pressing issues.

Economic decline, environmental issues, economic development, citizen interaction, recreational facilities and youth empowerment.

When I see these things are going to be addressed, when I feel it's a venue that's inclusive, I will go.

Sharon, when the opportunity presents itself for me to get first hand information from the primary source, I take it. Obviously the safety meetings wouldn't have been a waste for you if you had attended because then you would have heard the police chief's report for yourself and could have questioned him yourself, on the spot. Instead, we're spending alot of time trying to provide you with proof that the meeting took place and that he reported what he reported.

Candidates took alot of time to provide the LO with answers to questions that while still relevant, are not going to really be used as intended. Instead, they will provide one candidate with a leg up to adjust campaign strategy.

If you want a written reply, I suggest you email Councilman Demro. But I really think you should ask the question in public and receive an answer as such. Everyone may benefit from that exchange.

As for verbal manipulation, since you've never attended a public forum, you may be surprised at how transparent they are. As for your key issues, those are also Councilman Demro's key issues and he speaks to them at every opportunity.

Thanks, Suzanne

Suzanne - I may not have attended Lakewood's public forums, except for City Council, but I assure you that I have attended many pubic forums. As a matter of fact I've moderated some forums.

I know a little bit about debate formats and about deflection.

I'm questioning Ryan's refuting the statistics on his site that he refutes on this site.

That's all.

The LO format allows direct questions to the candidates on answers the provide in the format.

I've asked the question.

Section 8 is a topic that I am very sensitive about too Sharon and I was very interested in both candidates responses at the debate last week. Both candidates were very clear on the fact that behavior that was criminal should be punished and the vouchers pulled and the people reported to CMHA.

I don't think any of us want to defend keeping criminals in our city.

Neither said anything negative about getting rid of the many very needed Section 8 residents many of whom are seniors who comprise large parts of the Westerly, Fedor Manner and Lakeshore Tower. Nor did they say anything about the handicapped that comprise another large section.

Nor did they say anything negative about another large group are people who have lived in Lakewood been downsized and outsourced and are looking for new jobs that are getting some assistance in the meantime.

Do the candidates have a plan to address crime committed by non-section 8 residents? Will they be reported to the appropriate authorities as well? How about crime committed by non-section 8 Lakewood renters? Rocky River residents committing crime in Lakewood?, etc.

I have read the statistics provided by the Lakewood Municipal Court and discussed this issue and length with several Lakewood Police officers. There is crime in Lakewood, and at times certain crimes spike. However, based on my review of the crime statistics and these discussions, I do not believe that overall crime is on the rise in Lakewood.

What I have experienced in this political season is candidates trading on fear for political gain. At last count, there were eight 'safety meetings' from four different candidates, all planned and held from mid-summer to now.

Ok, safety is a concern. But I have seen neighborhoods destroyed by fear, innuendo, whispering campaigns, and code-words. I grew up in one of them. I believe that it is time to step back, realize that Lakewood is changing, the world is changing, and look to focus our energies on being accepting and inclusive, and figure out how we will work as a community - one community - not one community worrying about, watching and fearing another.

Dan Shields

Dan Shields wrote:I have read the statistics provided by the Lakewood Municipal Court and discussed this issue and length with several Lakewood Police officers. There is crime in Lakewood, and at times certain crimes spike. However, based on my review of the crime statistics and these discussions, I do not believe that overall crime is on the rise in Lakewood.

What I have experienced in this political season is candidates trading on fear for political gain. At last count, there were eight 'safety meetings' from four different candidates, all planned and held from mid-summer to now.

Ok, safety is a concern. But I have seen neighborhoods destroyed by fear, innuendo, whispering campaigns, and code-words. I grew up in one of them. I believe that it is time to step back, realize that Lakewood is changing, the world is changing, and look to focus our energies on being accepting and inclusive, and figure out how we will work as a community - one community - not one community worrying about, watching and fearing another.

Dan Shields

Dan


thank you for the words of wisdom. I was at the safety meeting and I do not ever remember the Chief saying crime was up. To be honest I remember the opposite.

The problem is, from what I can see and hear. Is that domestic violence is up, nuisance calls are up, and they are taxing the services and quality of life in Lakewood. "Serious crime" robbery, assault, etc is down.

I was at the park meeting when one candidate holding the meeting told the group about the Lakewood boy who was stabbed by a man from East Cleveland. When the mother sitting next to me asked, "When did that happen." The answer was, to paraphrase, "Well it could, kids come from East Cleveland to Lakewood."

Fear mongering, has been as I look back to a candidate on WTAM speaking about, "I am afraid to walk into Lakewood's Parks." Again the question is, how does this help attract anyone to Lakewood?

Outside of the crime issue, if there is one, is empty rentals, homes for sale, and the perception of safety. One only has to look to East Cleveland to understand what happens when "criminals" learn or think a city can no longer defend itself.

.