"Beirut Hilton"?

[dl meckes]

Ryan(s)-

I realized that I didn't mention that I wasn't amused by what I thought was a confusing bit of material sent to our home by Mr. Brennan, which seemed to indicate that he had been backed by the Lakewood Democratic Club. I didn't read the fine print as to who sent the mailing out until DH pointed it out to me, but I did feel it was misleading. Mr. Brennan isn't the first to use this sort of trick, but I wish he would be the last.

Since the endorsed Dems were Fitzgerald, Dever & Antonio, leaving Antonio off did seem to indicate that the local Dems had changed their endorsement.

Mr. Caroll left Fitzgerald & Dever entirely off one of his pieces, as if he is simply in a race against Brennan & Antonio.

And for the record, I was on Mayor George's steering committee in the last mayoral election. This is no secret. The Mayor has never made any promises to me or deals with me, but he did appoint me to the Loan Advisory Board because of my long time interest in such community building. Since I have been very active in these areas with different groups in Cleveland, it was nice to have a chance to participate in my home town of Lakewood and serve my city.

Tom George's campaign wasn't the first Mayoral campaign for which I volunteered. I also volunteered on Pam Smith's mayoral run. (To be perfectly truthful, Ms. Smith paid me for my efforts with a $10 gift certificate to Malley's.)

As you know, there are some issues where I feel Ryan Demro really got things right and some issues where I don't agree with Mr. Demro. My Dear Husband will testify that there is not one human being with whom I totally agree on every issue and he will also testify that I speak my mind. But somehow, Tom George is controlling people or busy making secret deals.

[Bill Call]

One reason I hate political campaigns is that the campaign evolves into a debate about petty politics. Even the guys I vote for and support are not immune.

If the City has no money:

Why are employees given raises?
Why is abuse of fire department overtime ignored?
Why does the City have 80 more employees than it did 15 years ago?
Why don't City employees pay at least 25% of the health insurance premium?

Development:

How do you have development in a fully developed city without eminent domain?
How does Lakewood compete with suburbs with plenty of empty land?
If Rockport Square fails should we care?
Can the City help development projects succeed?

Taxes:

If we have the highest property tax rate and the highest income tax rate in the state why should people stay in Lakewood?

[Thomas J. George]

Bill,

Very quick responses to some of your very complex and complicated questions.

First, labor contracts involving public entities in Ohio, including the City of Lakewood, are government by the State Employee Relations Board (SERB). There are strict and defined legal procedures for resolving labor disputes and for contract negotiations.

After intense and hard bargaining with seven separate bargaining units, some pay raises were granted City employees as the result of binding arbitration, fact-finding and the threat of binding arbitration conducted by an independent arbitrator. The threat of an unfair labor practices violation prohibits me from providing more information. The Ohio Open Records Law also prevents disclosure of discussion of labor negotiations.

Firefighters overtime is mostly the result of staffing mandates within the Fire Department.....it is more inexpensive to pay overtime than to hire new firefighters to meet the staffing requirements.

Unlike some suburban Fire Departments, Lakewood's Fire Department operates at full mandated strength.

Unless we reduce our fire and EMS service, we will continue to face some degree of fire department overtime as off duty firefighters are called in to replace absent ones.

I'm sure you are not suggesting saving money by reducing Fire and EMS service.

As far as having more City employees, I have REDUCED the number of City workers by 23 since taking office Jan. 1, 2004, saving the taxpayers over $1.1 million. We are however, reaching the point where further staffing reductions will mean visible reductions in City service levels.

If you think back to 1980, look at some of the City services now provided to residents.

For instance, the City now provides for School Crossing guards...how many of you over 30 years old can remember having an adult school crossing guard when you were attending school?

EMS service is now a city service...remember not so long ago when EMS was provided by private companies and funeral homes?

Last, City administrative employees are now, for the first time in City history, making a health care contribution...and a significant one at that. I truly appreciate these employees, recognizing the financial strain rising health care costs place on our City's finances, for making this contribution.

We are finalizing a tough collective bargaining process, having reached agreement with several bargaining units. I can assure you, at no time in the City's history has more effort has been made to protect the taxpayers' pocket book.

We have negotiated historic concessions from our bargaining units. Fortunately for all of us, our bargaining units have caring, understanding and concerned members and leadership which goes a long way in making these needed concessions possible.

[Donald Farris]

Hi,
Mr Call, you said, "How do you have development in a fully developed city without eminent domain?"

Look at the Rockport project. Mayor George deserves praises for the good job he has done to get this important development project in without attempting eminent domain.

Whether a city is built-out or not, someone owns all the property in Ohio. The issue isn't whether there is homes("built-out") or farms("green fields") on the property. The issue is whether developers want to use the fair market system to purchase property (as you and I do) on the open market or have local elected officials attempt to take it.

The city of New London, CT wanted a huge development. They wanted people kicked out of their homes for it. They determined their favorite bar could stay but those homes had to go. They wasted $ 73,000,000 of the limited tax revenue they had and many many years to force a development that did not naturally fit in their community. I believe they would have done more for their city to have worked with the community and fit the development in as Mayor George has encouraged the developers to do with Rockport.

Eminent Domain is not a requirement of economic development.

There are many things we can do as a city to promote economic development without taking the property of those that want to be in Lakewood. These are simple things that can begin with just respecting others property.

Perhaps, you would be willing to work with us to implement some of these other ideas that would promote economic development in a much more productive manner than eminent domain ever could.

[Bill Call]

Mayor:

Thanks for your response.

I have you at a disadvantage. I am not burdened by responsibility or accountability.

You are constrained by various laws and the need for the administration to be on speaking terms with city employees. If you could run the City as a private company I would be more critical of your efforts.

[Lynn Farris]

I would like to echo Don's post.

I would hold our current Mayor out as having done a fine job of encouraging development in our city without Eminent Domain. I would venture to guess that more development has occurred without Eminent Domain in his short tenure, than occurred in the previous administration.

Green fields are owned! The Ohio Farm Bureau reports over 100 calls about eminent domain abuse a year. They have testified in front of our state senate and house about this problem.

The First Suburbs Consortium, of which Lakewood is a member testified that they do not want to see "Kelo types of legislation" enacted in Ohio. What they prefer was financial instruments from the state to assist in cities with small in-fill developments. This is much like what our current administration is doing and I can bet they would like more state assistance in this.

Jane Jacobs writes eloquently about this. She is one of the pioneers of Urban Development. Read her writings or her books. She is far more eloquent that I am. Here is her amicus brief on the Kelo case: http://www.ij.org/pdf_folder/private_pr ... cobs05.pdf

Thanks

[kate parker]

back to the original post that started this thread comparing westend apartments to the beruit hilton. as politically incorrect as that sounded, the point was dead on.

if people believe lakewood is the bestest, most beautiful city in the world they live in a pod. not only the westend apartment buildings, but several other sections of this city do indeed resemble ransacked nations. should the local government take away these properties? not in my opinion. however, the property owners should be held accountable for the eyesores that many of the properties have become.

it was mentioned that the apartments were some of the only ones that were handicap accessible. that's not entirely true as there are several buildings accessible to the handicap here in lakewood. and even if it were true does that mean that the handicapped people should have to endure living in less than acceptable standards to the eye? i mean, hey they can get in and out of the building ok so who cares if the building looks like crap right? talk about politically incorrect.

instead of talking about how to add-on to this city how about talking about fixing up the many eyesores that dot lakewood's landscape. and i'm not talking about signing any silly pledge. leave the pledges to pbs and just get the job done.

kate