Sewer/Water Rates Set to Rise

Euclid Waste Water Treatment Plant/System

Euclid's Lakeshore Treatment plant is a regional plant, treating flows from Euclid, Willoughby Hills, Willowick, Wickliffe and parts of Richmond Hts and South Euclid.

Euclid's system, like most others throughout the US treats sanitary, and storm water. To keep the treatment plant from flooding in heavy rains, there are relief points called overflows.. In heavy rains, storm and sanitary waters mix and can be discharged directly into Lake Erie. Euclid can minimally treat most storm water, but not to the level mandated by the Federal Clean Water Act.

Since 2005, the City and EPA have engaged in a dialogue on how to bring our Treatment System into compliance.

In 2011, the City of Euclid entered into a Consent Decree in Federal Court to implement improvements to our treatment system.

Why are Rates proposed to increase?

1) To pay for the everyday operations at the plant.

2) To pay for the proposed capital improvements to the plant itself.

Euclid raises money for the system based on water consumed. According to the Administration, water consumption has fallen even though the number of accounts in the service area has stayed about the same. Less water used means less revenue. There are also approximately 4 million dollars in delinquent accounts throughout the system.

What the New Rates will look like.

Your sewer bill is calculated based on consumption (how many MCF's that you use, 1 MCF=7,500 gallons of water). Euclid residents pay $46.17 per MCF. The incremental breakdown of this charge is as follows

Euclid Residents Currently Pay: Rates residents will pay if approved.

Current Total Rates, 2012 = $46.17/MCF

Proposed Total 2012 Rates = $58.17/MCF

(effective April, 2012)

Here is the Breakdown:

Plant Operations: Included in this are salaries, benefits, utility costs, supplies and minor capital items:

2012 Current = $19.60 Proposed 2012 = $24.60

Plant Capital Investment: Major improvements to the Plant itself

2012 Current = $ 4.08 Proposed 2012 = $8.08

Peterson Charge: For new sewer construction

2012 Current = $ 11.88 Proposed 2012 = $13.88

Cleveland meter reading charge:

2012 Current = $1.61 Proposed 2012 = $1.61

Waterline Fund: Used to help replace and repair water lines throughout the city in conjunction with Cleveland Water Department, and, to restore roadways and landscaping affected by such work.

2012 Current = $9.00 Proposed 2012 = $10.00

Currently the proposed legislation to raise rates is on the agenda for City Council review. The proposed final vote is scheduled for Monday, March 6th.

EPD - Property Room Theft

The Cuyahoga County Sherrif's Dept report shows there is enough evidence that theft occurred from the Euclid Police Department Narcotics Property Room. All reported findings points to the late Detetvie. Sgt., Kevin Blakeley as the sole person responsible. The theft of funds appears to have occurred for better part of a decade.

Yet, there are several questions that remain outstanding that must be put to rest.

First, who did Det. Blakeley report too?

Second, why were audits of the property rooms not conducted. Indications are that inventories and audits were not done for years.

Third, who else besides Det. Blakeley had access to the accounts where the funds turned up missing?

Certainly, Det. Blakeley would have had to answer to serious charges. However, a review of EPD policies shows that enough safeguards were in place, and, enough warning were made that most, if not all of this should have been prevented.

EPD Internal Polices Titled "Internal Control of Forfeited and Seized Properties" dated 2/28/1991 spells out some of the requirement for all units of the department on how to handle

property and monies coming into the hands of the EPD.

In short, each and every pieces of property or money is to be tagged and cataloged: any and all funds cataloged;records coordinated with the City Finance Department to maintain accurate records. Finally, there is a section of the policy that describes how each year reports on any and all properties seized must be transmitted by the Chief of Police (or designee) to the Attorney Generals Office (this requirement as since been repealed by the State of Ohio).

In the cover letter to this policy, then Chief Wayne Baumgart stated "It is the policy of the Euclid Police Department to maintain stringent control over all confidential fund monies and property and monies seized and/or confiscated. We must maintain close supervision of our funds with a cooperative effort from the City of Euclid Finance Department."

Unfortunately this does not seem to be the case. The EPD has two functioning property rooms:

the Narcotics section, and, then another one used by detectives and patrol officers.

Officers have brought up the lax conditions in the property rooms for years. Back in 2009, a detective brought up to command staff that an entire audit/inventory of the general property room was required, and that too many individuals had access to that room. The officer felt strongly enough that he stated that the integrity of that property room could very well be compromised.

Det Kevin Blakeley was assigned to the general property room on 10/21/2010. On March 30 of this year, he submitted a memo to superiors about the property room: he pointed out that log books were missing, door locks were broken and that no audits or inventories had been done."

Again, none of this excuses what was described in the Sherriff's Dept Report.

But, what it does reinforce are the findings of OAPC report: That in many ways, the EPD was

poorly run and adrift.

If polices were followed, updated and enhanced, the thefts described might have been caught or prevented years ago.

This is just another episode that calls into doubt the leadership of the Euclid Police Department under Chief Repicky, and Mayor Cervenik.

Good government demands that an entire administrative review of this matter be done.

On Jobs and Leadership

The election is about a week away now, folks. November 8th will determine the future direction of this City. It is in yours hands, as it should be.

I did want to touch base on a couple of items that have come to my attention.

First, being the latest mailer from Mayor Cervenik. He claims that he has helped retain or created about 3500 jobs in Euclid, and, then proceeds to list the various companies that have added jobs.

Jobs, growth, of course, are what this City desperately needs. Jobs, and, the tax revenue it brings are the very life blood of City Services all of you expect.

What the mailer does not tell, or explain is over what time period any of these retained or created jobs occurred: since he became Mayor in 2003? Or, was it in the last year? That is unknown.

If we do some math, the total new jobs listed come to 405. He also listed Bluestone Business Park (former Chase Brass site) as the home to 1000 jobs (when the economy recovers).

Folks, Bluestone Business Park is empty! Nothing is on it. The assumption that it will contain

1000 jobs is pure guess work by the Mayor. Certainly he has no idea when it will be filled, and/or how many jobs will come from it. But, the last check with the owner, Fogg indicated

that any interest so far comes from warehouse type firms, firms that will bring few jobs.

Also missing from the Mayor's piece is the loss of jobs Euclid has suffered over the years of his Administration. Topping that list is Park-Ohio which took about 400 jobs out of the City several years ago.

The point here is that under this Administration, Euclid is on a jobs tread mill: some businesses

have grown, or come to Euclid, others have shrunk or left the City. Too many times the small businesses interested in Euclid are ignored by the current Administration.

To move ahead, we must jump off this treadmill. To do that, not only must we work with our larger firms, which we do now, but, we must begin cultivating those interested in opening

up small businesses. To do that, we must better integrate the activities of the Chamber of Commerce with city efforts to attract and grow jobs.

As a mentioned in earlier blogs, a real strategy to "Buy Euclid" must be implemented for the retail sector, along with developing a "commercial/industrial" pool that encourages local industry

to purchase from Euclid or Northeast Ohio firms. This will truly create jobs and City tax revenue.

The OAPC Report

On October 17th, the Ohio Association of Police Chief issued their report on the conditions of

the Euclid Police Department. Broken down into 18 sections, it should be used as a blueprint to make sweeping changes in how the Department is run. Police Chief Steven Sarver of Newark, and, Police Chief Douglas Knight of Vandalia conducted the top to bottom review.

Any organization is a reflection of its core values and missions statement. In good organizations each employee understands and works toward the values of that statement. The Euclid Police Department current mission statement is confusing and too long, according to OACP. Even when a committee was appointed to review that statement, Chief Repicky ignored the new statement

Leadership communication flows from the core statement of values. Great communication is the hallmark of well functioning organizations. While policies and procedures of the Police Department show a willingness to communicate, it is not translating into real communication with staff. When asked by OACP if “critical information is communicated efficiently” only 4.08% respondents said yes. 57.1% said “no.” In another question, when asked if “your input is considered before important decisions are made” 0% said “yes” while 80.9% said “no.”

Lack of communication has done much to undermine the spirit and cohesiveness within the Euclid Police Department. This is clearly illustrated in the management-labor area. OACP states that “a healthy relationship between labor and management is non-existent at this time.” Part of the contract between the City and Fraternal Order of Police Local #18 calls for a Labor-Management Committee consisting of the Mayor (or designee) Police Chief, and members of the FOP. In well functioning organizations, such a committee should meet every three months or so. Frequent meetings creates open line of communication, and building mutual trust. Euclid’s last meeting was held over a year ago and amounted to little more than grip sessions. OACP recommends that for EPD to move forward, labor and management must be willing to sit face to face and discuss issues before they become problems.

Two cases in particular that has caused much friction within the department. First is the lack of performance reviews for 2010 to the present. Chief Repicky stated that given retirements and supervisory personnel, it would be unfair to give review. The second is the need for 4 police captains.

Chief Repicky (and the Mayor) believed that not filling the position was a budgetary matter. Members of the department believe that it a personal and vindictive move based on who would next be promoted. OACP believes that since no conversation about dropping to three captains occurred prior to the latest opening, there is some credibility to staff feelings. OAC feels until both of these matters are resolved, morale cannot be restored.

Lack of a clear vision, poor communication and labor management mistrust creates an atmosphere where most officers enjoying being out of the Police Station and out on the street. As OACP reports, command staff confirms that “neither the Administration nor the police department establish annual written goals or specific and measurable objective by which to assess Euclid police performance. Further, the police department has no formal mechanism or periodic survey of citizens satisfaction to assess the degree to which the police and service philosophies conform to expectations of the community and city administration. One command officer described the current state of the EPD goals and objectives as “surviving and maintaining.” Another patrol supervisor, in a separate interview said, “We don’t know what we’re going, or what is expected of us.”

In many ways, the department is adrift, its effectiveness more the result of individual officers, rather than organization excellence. An example cited by OACP is in crime prevention. Euclid only one officer is trained in crime prevention techniques, and that the commitment to crime prevention has fallen off, according to a police supervisor. OACP recommends that ALL members of the Department share in crime prevention responsibilities. A good program of crime prevention addresses the community’s perception and misperception of crime in Euclid. Every few years, such programs must be evaluated for effectiveness and adjusted accordingly.

The focal point of all of these issues appears to be Chief Jim Repicky. The OACP report makes no ultimate value judgment of his leadership. Yet OACP reports, that the effectiveness of the lines of communication among the captains and Chief Repicky was poor. In his 3 years as Chief the command staff met together only 3 times, the Chief ultimately ending them all together. This means that critical information was not share uniformly among the chief and the captains. This ties in with the answers received from FOP members as to the three most important issues facing the department. Answers included poor leadership, trust, favoritism, personal agendas morale, no input. While not all the fault of Chief Repicky, the rejection of his leadership by his own staff was clear and overwhelming. He had no real choice but to step down.

One individual the OACP does not mention is Chief Repicky’s supervisor, Mayor Bill Cervenik. As the city safety director, he is ultimately responsible for what happens within the department. What can be gathered from OACP Report is that Mayor Cervenik failed to provide adequate supervision for Mr. Repicky. In the area of labor management, he very well could have intervened and insisted on frequent meetings between Police Management and the FOP. At the same time, Mr. Cervenik allowed members of the Department to speak to him directly, rather than through the Labor Management Council. Thus, he undermined is own chain of command, without providing feed back to the Chief to improve his performance.

For a Mayor that prides himself on keeping the safety forces strong, the OACP provides a devastating critique of his own management of the Euclid Police Department. It appears that Mr. Cervenik placed more value on his friendship with Chief Repicky, than on the well being of the EPD.

An Editorial on the PD Editorial

The Plain Dealer Endorsement

It surprising that the Plain Dealer endorsed Bill Cervenik for another term

What is disappointing are the numerous errors in their reporting and, their blatant disregard for the two challengers, Mr. Johnson and Ms. Mancuso.

First on the PD's error list is that Mr. Cervenik asked Police Chief Jim Repicky to step down. As of today, Mr. Repicky is still on the job, earning his salary as Chief of Police.

Second, Mr. Cervenik did not settle the Department of Justice voting rights case against Euclid.

In fact the City went to court and lost, and, the City Council settled the case. And, what the Plain Dealer forgot was that Mr. Cervenik supported fighting the Justice Department, stating in Scene Magazine that the DOJ "should be ashamed of themselves." for their prosecution of Euclid.

Third, Ms. Mancuso did not lead the attempted recall of Bill Cervenik in 2005. In fact that was

Mr. John Conway. By the way, in the fall election of 2005, after the recall election, Mr. Conway was elected to City Council with 57% of the vote.

But what should insult every thinking Euclid voter is the dismissive way the Plain Dealer treats

Mr. Johnson and Ms. Mancuso.

Mr. Johnson, for example, served the City admirably for many decades as Administrative and

Finance Director. The Plain Dealer calls Mr. Johnson's ideas "small bore." You can almost hear the editorial writers snickering over how clever they were. Insulting is more like it.

Ms. Mancuso's long service at Metro Health probably has done more to save lives of ALL residents in Northeast Ohio, especially for the poor and less fortunate than few others. To insinuate that somehow her housing plan is discriminatory shows that the Plain Dealer's claim of "Editorial Excellence" should more appropriately called "Editorial Laziness.

The Plain Dealer says that Mr. Cervenik is not a showy, big-vision leader. I agree.

If he were, he would understand the very real challenges faced by the City:

Falling population (under 50 thousand)

Growing poverty (16% as of 2009 and climbing)

Empty commercial and retail space

Neighborhoods littered with empty homes

Declining Recreation programs

Decline in City Services

If he were a big vision leader, he would have realized decades ago the value of a lakefront marina, and Shore Cultural Centre for example instead of fighting tooth and nail against both.

The Plain Dealer fails to understand, that solid redevelopment plans will combat Euclid's clear decline.

Instead they talk about his sensible leadership, leadership that has brought to you:

City spending increases at roughly a million dollars each year during his 8 years in office, from roughly 32 million in 2002 to over a projected 40 million this year.

Borrowing 3 million dollars to balance the budget in 2004, and, imposing trash and lighting fees in 2009.

Mr. Cervenik did settle the court case with the Providence Baptist Church, informing City Council by e-mail. (BTW the Plain Dealer could not even name the church, just referring to it as "a black church),

As you might recall, the citizens of Euclid decided to put this rezoning on the ballot, and they rejected the plans of the church. That was in 2004. As of today, Providence Baptist Church

has built nothing at Hillandale. History proves that Euclid residents were right in questioning church plans.

In his role as Safety Director, he is responsible for the chaos that has engulfed the Euclid Police Department, as indicated by lawsuits, the FOP no confidence vote and the Sheriff' Department investigation.

But finally, it is curious that the in making their decision, the Plain Dealer ignored their own reporting on county corruption, and the connection to Bill Cervenik.

4/27/2008: The Plain Dealer ran an article on how politicians and their relatives filled dozens of

well paying jobs at the County Recorders office. Then county Recorder Pat O"Malley handled

the hiring for this agency, jobs were seldom posted and, O'Malley made the final decisions. The Plain Dealer profiled literally dozens of individuals that owed their jobs to political connections.

One of those jobs went to Tony Sustarsic, former Euclid Councilman at Large, son of former Council President Jerry Sustarsic. And, his reference was Mayor Bill Cervenik.

11/30/2008 The Plain Dealer investigation reveals how a well connected company,

1-888-Ohio Comp scooped up most of the Workers Compensation medical claims business in Cuyahoga County. This company's connections reached directly into (former) County Auditor

Farnk Russo's office. Mr. Russo and (former) County Commissioner Jimmy Dimora pressured

mayors to make the switch to 1-888-Ohio Comp. Mr. Russo's son Vince worked for the firm.

The owners of the firm were shown to have made substantial contributions to mayors and candidates for mayor throughout the county.

In Bill Cervenik's first campaign for Mayor in 2003, Tom Coyne, former Brook Park Mayor and

(then) consultant for Ohio Comp and the one of the principals owner of the firm, Sam Lucarelli, contributed $6000.00 to his tight campaign against Ed Gudenas. The following May, Cervenik switched the City to 1-888-Ohio Comp.

(For the full article, see the link below)

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/11/auditor_frank_russos_links_to.html

Mr. Cervenik seemed to be a willing part of the easy, sleazy way the county was formerly run.

The Plain Dealer chose to ignore all this, and chose to ignore the fact the Euclid voters have

clear and competent choices for Mayor, rather than 4 more years of the same old stuff.

The Endorsement Game

The Endorsement Game

President George Washington had a deep suspicion of what we call today political parties. He believed that political parties ("factions" as they were called then) injected themselves between

the citizen and government. This interfered with the direct connection between the citizen and the government. Each citizen had the intelligence to make up their own mind, Washington believed, without the prepackaged ideas produced by political parties. Washington believed parties created followers, not independent thinking citizens that democracy needs to thrive.

President Washington suspicions are spot on. How many times have we seen both political parties pedal a party line, and expect citizens to simply follow? And, how many times have

we seen endorsements based solely on inside party connections, rather than truly on the best candidate.

Above all, party loyalty to seems to trump over all. In party structures, incumbent office holders are the most valuable. Its power and influence for state and national races. Challengers from the same party are frowned upon because that creates upset and discord and wastes money. Parties believe they must save their resources to take on the other party.

In the Euclid Mayor's race, you have this familiar pattern developing. The incumbent is endorsed because they are the incumbent. He is "our guy." Or, "we have always backed him."

And, this is true. Mayor Cervenik always had County party support, and, the support of

certain federal representatives.

You, as the citizen must ask yourself, HOW HAS THIS HELPED EUCLID?

Is the City better off after 8 years of this Administration? Are our neighborhoods safer? Are our rec programs better? Have major projects been completed?

Political parties at all levels have some democratic process to formally endorse candidates. The candidates actually interview for the endorsement. The a vote is held. This is far fairer to all party candidates and, is far more transparent.

At the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party level, NO EUCLID MAYORAL ENDORSEMENT WAS MADE. The vote tally had Mr. Cervenik with 10 votes, Ms. Mancuso with 9 and, Mr. Johnson with none.

What is even more interesting is the vote tally by the local Euclid Democratic Club.

The Results were:

Charlene Mancuso 15

Bill Cervenik 10

Jack Johnson 8

Christopher Lit. 2

Mancuso was the clear winner. But, more importantly, at both the county and local level, the leadership of Mr. Cervenik is rejected BY HIS OWN PARTY

He knows this, of course, so, he has simply called in the party loyalty card, which does not take into account the true condition of the City.

Endorsements are nice, and all politicians seek them. But, I have found over 10 years on City Council and, 5 campaigns that they have little bearing on the caliber of the candidate, or the condition of the community. Make sure you do your home work before voting.

After all, the real power is in your hands.

On Leadership and Vision for Mayor of Euclid

As the fall campaign deepens, the qualities of each of the Mayoral candidates are revealed.

The next mayor of Euclid absolutely must show both vision and leadership on the issues facing the City.

Recently, each of the candidate discussed the Shore Cultural Centre in an edition of the Euclid Observer. Each were asked about the City's financial support of the Centre, and, continuing

of the Coral Management Contract of the Centre. (See post "Shore'd Up, by Coral for my thoughts on Shore)

Their answers reveal much about their general vision and leadership qualities they would bring to office.

Bill Cervenik

Bill Cervenik is now an enthusiastic supporter of both Shore, and the Coral management contract. As he freely acknowledged, for about 18 of his 20 year public service he could see no value of Shore. In fact he was involved with ideas and plans to end Shore as an Arts and Culture Center: The 1990's Tops Supermarket plan, various condo plans for Shore, and, Senior Housing.

Asset, or burden? Demolish it or invest in it? Mr. Cervenik could not really decide, being unable to demolish the building or commit funds to fix it. In other words, the Shore issue was

allowed to drift so long it almost became unsalvageable.

His recent support for Shore is welcomed, of course. But, for his point that backing Coral proves he listens to good ideas. Well, the Coral management idea was originally mine; I then took to Council President Holzheimer-Gail and to the Economic Development Director. I can tell you that Mr. Cervenik was hostile to the entire idea. In both news stories and internal City e-mails, it was entirely negative. Only by teaming up with the Council President, and the Shore supporters, did the private management idea have any chance to succeed.

This shows the fatal flaw in Mr. Cervenik's leadership style: He judges ideas not on the merits, but, on who proposes them. This "us vs them" attitude has set Euclid back decades now.

Jack Johnson:

While not saying it directly, clearly Mr. Johnson hints that Shore should be closed. He states

that he supports Arts and Culture, just not necessarily there. He is puzzled and confused as to what actually takes place at Shore. He also claims that the CEO of Coral Company stated that

in hiring a development director, the building would be self-sufficient. All of this shows a total

lack of understanding of the Coral Strategic plan, a plan that Mr. Johnson should know very well

having sat through practically all the debates before City Council adoption.

What is also disappointing is that his answers show that he has not followed the developments at

Shore closely at all. He seems totally unfamiliar with the mission statement as developed by the Coral Co. and, adopted by the City: "To provide dynamic and high quality arts, cultural and lifelong learning experiences that build community, enhance quality of life and strengthen Euclid." The fall catalog provides countless examples of new arts related classes.

Even if you believe that Shore has no value, and, should be closed, what Mr. Johnson proposes

really offers the community no solution at all. He wants to put it on the ballot.

Shore's projected loss this year is about 120K. The pools lose about 150K per year, and the Orr Arena about 50K per year. Are these items also to go on the ballot? If not, why not? After all,

the vast majority of residents have not been to the pools, or the ice arena for decades, if ever. Out of all of these, only Shore really has a chance to become virtually self sufficient, and, is the only one that consistently draws people into downtown Euclid.

For someone professing to bring fresh ideas, the ballot idea is way beyond old and stale. Is Euclid to hold a special election to decide this matter? That will potentially cost the City thousands of dollars. The bottom line is that if he wants to get rid of Shore, do it! Don't hide behind a ballot initiative.

Charlene Mancuso:

Charlene Mancuso has shown clear commitment to Shore as an arts and cultural centre from the very beginning of her time on Council. Her answers show none of the "mush" Mr. Cervenik or Mr. Johnson have shown over the years. She states that Shore is an asset of the City's and, should be managed as such. Coral has done that. Clear vision, decisive response, reasoned approach.

Christopher Litwinonwicz

I was unable to really tell what his plans are for Shore. This shows a chaotic approach that can not serve the community well.

To summarize, Mr. Cevenik took decades to see the value of Shore. That is time wasted. Mr. Johnson seems to want Shore closed, is not aware of the progress at Shore and, wants to hide behind the old idea of a ballot initiative. Mr. Litwinowicz is incoherent. Ms. Mancuso's stance on Shore shows vision and leadership.

Euclid is desperate for both in the Mayor's office.

Councilman Langman is Glad to be Back

Why that title? Two reasons: first, because I have neglected the blog for far to long. Most of the summer was spent on working on my campaign literature and, the Euclid Post. Second, because

as it turns out I am running unopposed so will be back on City Council for the next term.

I find myself with mixed emotions about this. Happy to continue working for the citizens of Euclid, sort of glad to see what it is like to run unopposed, but, troubled that there are so many races in Euclid that are unopposed.

This is now two election cycles in a row where only 2 out of 9 council races are actually competitive. This is a bad pattern developing. As the City Council moves into the four year staggered term era, you can very possibly have some elections years where no council race is contested. That means that in the future, someone may gain a seat on City council by simply filling out some paper work and turning that into the Board of Elections. This is a disaster for our democratic process. It is a disaster for Euclid. We face very serious problems, very serious challenges. We will need the very best in leadership and ideas to meet those. The only way to get that in your public officials is to have spirited and contested races where the candidate with the best package of ideas should win.

City Council Resumes:

Tues, Sept 6, saw the first meeting of City Council. A 5 hour marathon. After ten years, folks, I still don't know how a meeting can last that long. I will only touch on one matter here for now as it relates to Council elections. The Federal Department of Justice is again reviewing information

related to the set up of City Council. As you might recall, the Department of Justice began a long
investigation into the City of Euclid back in 2002. Specifically, they wanted to determine if the method of electing City Council members violated the Federal Voting Rights act. After a federal trial, it was found that our former system of 4 wards and 4 at large council seats violated that act. The City was then divided into 8 wards.

The City's Charter calls for the adjustment of ward boundaries after every ten year federal census. This is to ensure that each ward contains about the same amount of residents. City Council passed changes to the ward boundaries in June. In short, these changes require the shifting of several streets from one ward to another. Several wards, saw no changes at all.

Yet, the City has been informed that the Department of Justice wants to review the entire process. At best, the DOJ will review, and, do nothing. At worst, they could file a motion with the federal court to block the fall council elections. It seems as if the DOJ feels that it must monitor the City for years and years to come.

The Fall Mayoral Election.

The method of electing City Councils has drastically changed in the ten years I have served.

Back in 2001, the Euclid citizen could vote for 6 council candidates in any election (Council President, 4 at large council members, and your specific ward council person). Now you can only vote for two. Many of you have no choice at all in electing a council representative. After this election, you will no longer be able to throw all the "bums" out in any one election. The Council elections will now be staggered: only 4 slots open every two years.

The result of all of this will make City Council elections less important. At the same time, it elevates the importance of the Mayoral election. As the Mayor is the only full time elected official, leadership and vision in this position is absolutely vital if Euclid is to flourish.

During my ten years of service on the City Council, I have served with both Mayor Oyaski and

Mayor Cervenik. Very different individuals, but, the direction of the City has remained very much the same. In fact, the City has followed the same course for at the very least the past

16 years.

As you decide who should lead the City going forward, you must first decide if you think the City is on the right track.

I don't believe that the City is on the right track. This is why I ran for City Council to begin with. While Euclid has made some progress, we are simply not moving fast enough, or, pushing the right initiatives that can truly make Euclid the community we all want to see.

Keep this in mind as the fall campaign season unfolds. I will be updating the Blog at least once a week (more often, I hope) to explain why I believe real change at the top is needed and, who can really deliver.