The Observation Deck

Ryan,

I am certainly in favor of further investigation of the Council/Manager form of government for Lakewood.

In fairness to voting residents, you will have to take a more sober approach to this process than you have demonstrated here. Information and discussion should be rational and unemotional.

You will encounter a lot of misconceptions and prejudices. Don't add your own.

This will be a very important issue. As much as I/we like to have fun with various issues and people here on the Deck, and elsewhere, I beg for an academic process with regard to the city manager question. Voters are entitled to an informed choice.

If you are as interested as you appear to be, you should involve Dr. Larry Keller, and other resources, inside, and outside, of the community.

Do it right, or don't bother.

Steve

.

Awww, Geeee Ryan,

Tom George was and is my high school friend.

I for one, while attempting to understand all that council animosity back then, fully understand as Thomas (Tip) O'Neil was supposed to have said "All politics is local".

But...

You need to understand that I did not neceasarily disagree about having a City Manager.

Under the parameters that you and Steve Davis suggest, that we (that is, that our Council reps can immediately fire the manager for cause) I think that a City Manager might be a viable option.

To recall a public official can be a difficult proposition to be sure. Just because I disagree with the Mayor on the garbage solution, for example, does not mean that he's not doing a good job overall.

You raise good proposals Ryan. The extent to which I would agree with them would depend upon safeguards put in place to protect the voice of the people with the process of redress of grievances.

Steve,

Please clarify your message. I generally find the way you treat me rather condescending. Given my credentials, the number of provisions in the existing charter that have been written by my hand, and the overwhelming approval they have been given by voters, your behavior is illogical.

I was hoping that you would have been one of the people who would have responded positively to my request, despite the fact that we have found it difficult to work together in the past.

You underestimate the voters if you think they would just let a random committee put something on the ballot and then vote for it. Lakewood voters have demonstrated the ability to discriminate between issues on a ballot.

I have a clear understanding of how to educate the community on this issue. If you would like to add to that process, please accept my invitation, but I am not going to continue to address the Monday Morning Quarterbacking or Ivory Tower pontification.

Ryan Patrick Demro wrote:Steve,

Please clarify your message. I generally find the way you treat me rather condescending. Given my credentials, the number of provisions in the existing charter that have been written by my hand, and the overwhelming approval they have been given by voters, your behavior is illogical.

I was hoping that you would have been one of the people who would have responded positively to my request, despite the fact that we have found it difficult to work together in the past.

You underestimate the voters if you think they would just let a random committee put something on the ballot and then vote for it. Lakewood voters have demonstrated the ability to discriminate between issues on a ballot.

I have a clear understanding of how to educate the community on this issue. If you would like to add to that process, please accept my invitation, but I am not going to continue to address the Monday Morning Quarterbacking or Ivory Tower pontification.

Ryan,

You're off to your usual good start. Exactly what I was talking about.

I'm in favor of trying a Council/Manager form of government in Lakewood, but this will go just about as far as your mayoral campaign if you continue this kind of behavior.

So go ahead, tout your "credentials", pat yourself on the back, attack people, and try to define everyone's reality for them. Maybe I'll just stay home for this one.

Go get 'em, tiger!

Steve

.

Well then, that certainly clarified that message.

Shawn Juris wrote:Well then, that certainly clarified that message.

Shawn

Having spoken to both, I can easily see the clarification.

Steve Davis has been pushing for a city manager for decades. I believe in both of this stints on the Charter Review he thought it was a good idea, and one worth looking at.

What Steve, and I am sure Ryan are both aware of, is that it has to be a rational in depth conversation backed on facts. Not emotional rhetoric.

Ryan is very passionate about government, and his experiences.

His personal warning was to make the case without the emotion, or else it
will fail if it comes to a vote.

Not very foggy at all, read the entire thread.

I see this as an amazing moment as both Steve and Ryan agree on looking at this form of government.


.

Jim,

Nice attempt at trying to be peacemaker, but it appears Steve and I will be in our usual states. I take action and he continues to talk about it forever.

Shawn,

I am two for two on ballot issues that Steve was opposed to because I was involved. He is a liberal and I am a conservative and he has trouble getting past that. The age thing is also an issue.

But feel free to examine my post, where is the "emotion?" I would like someone to point it out. Steve claims to look for facts, and I asked for an ounce of respect based on my record. So he takes a cheap shot regarding the mayors race. Where are you Steve? Why don't you take a stand? You could have made a much more vigorous case to City Council that we should not have dispensed with the legislation two years ago.

I am passionate about government and issues and I believe that non-partisan elections was positive for Lakewood. We have seen lots of candidates pop up and Independent voters are no long hemmed in by partisan elections.

Let's see what happens with this. I want to thank those who have already responded to the request for committee members. We will move forward.

Ryan Patrick Demro wrote:Jim,

Nice attempt at trying to be peacemaker, but it appears Steve and I will be in our usual states. I take action and he continues to talk about it forever.

Ryan

This is completely unfair.

Steve Davis has been championing this cause longer than you have been in politics. You know that is true.

The problem is, it is a very complex issue, that needs to be sold to the residents. Twice to my knowledge Steve and other charter review committees have included in a list of changes to be considered.

Now it is a time to take it to the people for an informed discussion and a vote. This is something I know you believe in as well.

I am very much on the edge on this. I know of examples of where it has worked and where it has not. I know of companies that were managed out of existence. So to say a city manager is the answer is very much an over simplification of the entire problem and solution.

Again I am sure you probably agree with that as we have had many discussions about this and other items.

FWIW

Jim,

I fully acknowledge that Steve has been talking about this for years. That is why I thought I might have an ally there for once; however, as we all know, talk is cheap. How long did this community talk about a skatepark? How much longer would we have gone without one if a dedicated citizens group and a willing councilman did not step up to make action out of words.

This is a different issue and will be handled differently. I am very interested in involving community groups help raise the level of dialogue on the issue, but at some point you have to take action. Maybe a decidedly negative response will result and the committee will determine that the issue should not proceed to the ballot, but you can't torpedo it from the beginning. And attacking the messenger is totally uncalled for.

Ryan Patrick Demro wrote: How long did this community talk about a skatepark? How much longer would we have gone without one if a dedicated citizens group and a willing councilman did not step up to make action out of words.

And attacking the messenger is totally uncalled for.

Ryan

You know I have always, well since the thingy out front of city hall to see you for the good you have done. Your work on the skatepark and many other items are to be applauded.

That said, "talk is cheap." is equally as uncalled for. Steve has worked within, the legal framework, and spent nearly a year if added all together on informing residents and council on both sides of this issue.

I know for a fact that Steve's greatest fear was that some of the emotion that you are truly entitled to, might make the issue harder to sort through, than a clinical look at both sides of this issue.

This issue is ever bit as complicated as water rights, community currency, and city funding in the future. I would agree with both of you that it is time to look at this in depth and bring it to a vote.

.

Jim, point well taken. We will proceed in that spirit. Thanks for he advice.

Perhaps it would be more advantageous for advocates of this form of government to post an explanation about what they are looking to do or what this City Manager's responsibilities would be.

It seems that the actual purpose is getting lost in this meaningless personal bickering. As a voter, this doesn't make me want to care more about the issue if the advocates can't get past personal attacks.

So please, in the spirit of informed electorates, what are you trying to do?

Thealexa Becker wrote:Perhaps it would be more advantageous for advocates of this form of government to post an explanation about what they are looking to do or what this City Manager's responsibilities would be.

They are looking for a magic bullet.

The City of Cleveland Heights has a City Manager. Over the last 20 years Cleveland Heights did not have the explosive growth in City employees that Lakewood experienced. On the other hand, even with a great many built in advantages over Lakewood, Cleveland Heights is in worse shape overall.

http://www.clevelandheights.com/citygovt.asp

Ed Fitgerald demonstrated how a man with a plan can accomplish a great deal in a short time. Too bad he is leaving before the job is done.

To what extent are Lakewood's problems beyond its control? Answer that question and you have taken the first step.

Ultimately, a city manager becomes the creature of the city council.

Bill Call wrote:

Thealexa Becker wrote:Perhaps it would be more advantageous for advocates of this form of government to post an explanation about what they are looking to do or what this City Manager's responsibilities would be.

They are looking for a magic bullet.

The City of Cleveland Heights has a City Manager. Over the last 20 years Cleveland Heights did not have the explosive growth in City employees that Lakewood experienced. On the other hand, even with a great many built in advantages over Lakewood, Cleveland Heights is in worse shape overall.

http://www.clevelandheights.com/citygovt.asp

Ed Fitgerald demonstrated how a man with a plan can accomplish a great deal in a short time. Too bad he is leaving before the job is done.

To what extent are Lakewood's problems beyond its control? Answer that question and you have taken the first step.

Ultimately, a city manager becomes the creature of the city council.

So what you are saying is that a City Manager is going to essentially be like a Prime Minister. I don't know if I like the idea of electing reps to one position and having them be elected by other officials to another.

Mr. Call, I do agree that a man with a plan does seem like the best alternative.

We also know the damage that a man or woman without a plan can reak on a city. I will post more information and resources this evening.