The Observation Deck

I understand that there are four wards in the City of Lakewood, each represented by one councilperson and three councilpersons who run are at large that have a seat on the city council.

Lakewood's population is around 54,000 souls and according the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections there are 36,379 registered voters in the City of Lakewood, assuming they are all still alive.

The number of voters in the wards are Ward 1 - 8,990, Ward 2 - 8,902, Ward 3 - 8,742 and Ward 4 - 9,745.
Now what is wrong with this picture? There is a 12.5 percent difference in the number of voters between Ward 3 and Ward 4, and a 9 percent difference between the average of Ward 1 and Ward 2 and Ward 4. These are significant differences and don't represent the spirit of democracy that of every citizen having an equal vote for their council representation. This wasn't overlook by mistake, unless the city administration and the council are more inept and inert than I thought possible of elected officials.

Richard Baker wrote:I understand that there are four wards in the City of Lakewood, each represented by one councilperson and three councilpersons who run are at large that have a seat on the city council.

Lakewood's population is around 54,000 souls and according the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections there are 36,379 registered voters in the City of Lakewood, assuming they are all still alive.

The number of voters in the wards are Ward 1 - 8,990, Ward 2 - 8,902, Ward 3 - 8,742 and Ward 4 - 9,745.
Now what is wrong with this picture? There is a 12.5 percent difference in the number of voters between Ward 3 and Ward 4, and a 9 percent difference between the average of Ward 1 and Ward 2 and Ward 4. These are significant differences and don't represent the spirit of democracy that of every citizen having an equal vote for their council representation. This wasn't overlook by mistake, unless the city administration and the council are more inept and inert than I thought possible of elected officials.

Richard

The high rate in Ward 4 is due to the Gold Coast. It makes sense having the Gold Coast all in one ward.

The Wards are divided from north to south for "even distribution" of all sorts of items. It does provide a nice cross section of Lakewood of course Ward 1 is heavily weighted for Clifton Park approved and funded representation. Everywhere you have to appeal to a large variety of Lakewoodites.

I have proposed many times would we better served by 3 or 5 full time At Large Council members for the entire city? Pay more, get better representation.

.

[quote="Jim O'Bryan"][quote="Richard Baker"]I understand that there are four wards in the City of Lakewood, each represented by one councilperson and three councilpersons who run are at large that have a seat on the city council.

Lakewood's population is around 54,000 souls and according the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections there are 36,379 registered voters in the City of Lakewood, assuming they are all still alive.

The number of voters in the wards are Ward 1 - 8,990, Ward 2 - 8,902, Ward 3 - 8,742 and Ward 4 - 9,745.
Now what is wrong with this picture? There is a 12.5 percent difference in the number of voters between Ward 3 and Ward 4, and a 9 percent difference between the average of Ward 1 and Ward 2 and Ward 4. These are significant differences and don't represent the spirit of democracy that of every citizen having an equal vote for their council representation. This wasn't overlook by mistake, unless the city administration and the council are more inept and inert than I thought possible of elected officials.[/quote]


Richard

The high rate in Ward 4 is due to the Gold Coast. It makes sense having the Gold Coast all in one ward.

The Wards are divided from north to south for "even distribution" of all sorts of items. It does provide a nice cross section of Lakewood of course Ward 1 is heavily weighted for Clifton Park approved and funded representation. Everywhere you have to appeal to a large variety of Lakewoodites.

I have proposed many times would we better served by 3 or 5 full time At Large Council members for the entire city? Pay more, get better representation.

Jim,

It is difficult for me to grasp that Lakewood Ward boundaries would be determined by other items and not solely on the population. I don’t remember anytime during a civics class a teacher advising us that fair and equable representation boundaries are not only based on population but should be adjusted for “items” such as wealthy and influential. If the ward boundaries are determined using this method in the City of Lakewood, that is gerrymandering.

Incidentally, Clifton Park has a little over 200 homes, assuming there are two registered voters from each home, 10 percent of the Ward 1 voters will not determine who represents it.

Ward 1 and 2 contain the average registered voters for the four wards. Since Wards 3 and 4 have contiguous borders, resetting them to a more equable distribution of registered voters would be a simple task. In reality most people don’t care what Ward they live in. People want the typical city services, an open and honest administration and council, reasonable taxes and representatives who have the spine to stand up and say no, regardless of what their constituents want.

I would suggest that each ward have two representatives who will be held accountable by the smaller group of voters and get rid of the at large members. Higher wages for the council and mayor will equate to more professional representation is a myth. The Lakewood School District funding that is one of the highest in the area. Yet they are the perfect example that money does not improve performance. Their mediocre socialistic performance in the state rating compared to other districts with significantly less funding, proves the point.

Oh, who is responsible for the God awful salt shakers, iron trees and the graffiti green paint job on the roadway at Sloane and Detroit before the bridge? Is this punishment for the west side?

Oh, who is responsible for the God awful salt shakers, iron trees and the graffiti green paint job on the roadway at Sloane and Detroit before the bridge? Is this punishment for the west side?

Funniest quote of the day!

Aside from the salt shakers, a good question might be when were the ward boundaries last redrawn? If before the big apartment buildings, then it is not gerrymandering but simply lines that should be redrawn to equalize the changes in the districts. If it was after the big apartment buildings, then why was it done this way, and again the lines should be redrawn.

On Jim's proposal to go with all at-large council positions, I not only disagree, but think consideration should be given to further dividing the wards and have all ward council representives. I'll take the liberty of suggesting Jim's perspective comes from his position of viewing the city as a whole. On the other hand, I look at my ward and see many ways it should have a dedicated advocate in City Hall, except for many years it hasn't. Politicians ran for office, saw the power of taking city-wide positions, and promptly forgot about who they were elected to represent. It would be great if the new class of ward council members saw themselves more as representatives and less as entry-level statemen/women.

I also appreciate that at this time of year, I can go out to walk the dogs and run into one or both of the two competing candidates, as was the case tonight. That would happen less often with all at-large council members.

And thanks to Richard Baker for calling attention to this.

are the wards apportioned by population, by registered voters, or by qualified voters?

My solution would be the exact opposite of Jim's.
Instead of increasing the pay rate for council members a few years ago, I felt they should have expanded the number of members to nine.
Six wards and three at large members.

Smaller wards would accomplish the following:
*They would reduce the cost of running for office, which would boost the chances of "non-machine" candidates
*They would put council members into closer contact with their wards.
*They would increase the diversity of council members. Smaller wards would increase the odds of racial minority representation on council. Heck, it might even open the door to a Republican winning (oh my!)

Michael Deneen wrote:My solution would be the exact opposite of Jim's.
Instead of increasing the pay rate for council members a few years ago, I felt they should have expanded the number of members to nine.
Six wards and three at large members.

Smaller wards would accomplish the following:
*They would reduce the cost of running for office, which would boost the chances of "non-machine" candidates
*They would put council members into closer contact with their wards.
*They would increase the diversity of council members. Smaller wards would increase the odds of racial minority representation on council. Heck, it might even open the door to a Republican winning (oh my!)

Mr. Deneen,

Expanding the County Commissioners/County Council didn't help.

It seems to me that there is the dichotomy at play locally and nationally:

Those who oppose and rail against corrupt government are also in favor of expanding it.

Could it be at least theoretically possible that if we cleaned it up, it would be more efficient and be contained or even contracted?

Michael Deneen wrote:My solution would be the exact opposite of Jim's.
Instead of increasing the pay rate for council members a few years ago, I felt they should have expanded the number of members to nine.
Six wards and three at large members.

Smaller wards would accomplish the following:
*They would reduce the cost of running for office, which would boost the chances of "non-machine" candidates
*They would put council members into closer contact with their wards.
*They would increase the diversity of council members. Smaller wards would increase the odds of racial minority representation on council. Heck, it might even open the door to a Republican winning (oh my!)

Why have at-large council members at all?