SHORE ' D UP - BY CORAL

Only in Euclid can the same issue be debated off and on for 25 years. No, I'm not talking about marina development, but, rather Shore Cultural Centre. What should be a deliberate process guided by good planning, and competent management is instead kicked around like a worn football.

On Sept 7 th, Council granted the Coral Co. the manager of Shore for the past 15 months a 15 month extension thru Dec. 2011. At the same meeting, Council also granted capital funds to install a modern boiler and thermostatic controls (70K expense)

For those of you just tuning in, the City's history with Shore has been a dreary exercise of befuddlement and neglect if not outright hostility.

Bought from Euclid Public Schools in the mid 80's to be a Cultural Center, the City's management has drifted from the Economic Development Department to the Rec Department. Not having the skills to actually program and run the facility, much of the responsibility drifted to the volunteer Shore Board.

Passionate about Shore, but, lacking the expertise to run such a large facility, the Board was left with a difficult task of advocating for Shore, while splitting programing duties with a City Administration at times openly hostile to its existence.

At various times, the City has cooked up deals to demolish Shore for a Tops Super Market, or to
develop various housing schemes at Shore. None really had any solid facts to support those
plans.

The City has "winged" it with Shore for decades: there was never any operational, capital or strategic plan for the building. Without a plan, the results could only be bad.

That's not to say that good things weren't happening INSIDE Shore They were: theatre productions, Euclid Orchestra, Euclid Hunger Center, Red Cross, etc. Former City Councilman Pat Delaney spearheaded the drive to bring the Euclid Culinary School to Shore. But these were predominately in spite of the Administration, not because of it.

Two years ago, I wanted to change the debate and solve the "problem" of Shore once and for all.

My assumption (which many others had before me) was that managed right, Shore would take its rightful place as the catalyst for downtown rebirth.

This concept has been done all over N.E. Ohio. Areas benefiting from arts as economic development include: Collinwood (Arts Collinwood) Shaker Square, Larchmere (Cleveland)
Gordon Square (Detroit & w 65th) Beck Center (Lakewood).

I made the initial contact with Coral, and, they were interested in managing Shore. The Mayor
was adamantly opposed. But after going through a lengthy proposal process, where the City solicited over 40 firms only three remained. Coral's management plan; Spies Group (building a new library in place of Shore); and, City Architecture's plan to build subsided housing at Shore.

Asking the residents to pay for a new library was a non starter; no firm was willing to commit to housing at Shore. That left Coral.

Coral came on board in May of 2009: They immediately laid out a management plan, and spent the summer of 2009 seeking input on the condition of the building. Experts (heating, electrical, structural) brought in by Coral immediately concluded that many of the false rumors of a building in dire need of immediate millions in repairs was not valid. At the same time, Coral held numerous public meetings and meetings with City officials. Going into these meetings, Coral held no preconceptions that that the building should even be saved.

Last Sept. Coral unveiled their strategic plan for Shore Cultural Centre. Their first conclusion; Shore has value! Shore should stay! Backed by exhaustive data, the plan laid out how to build on what Shore was already doing. Coral clearly understood that City finances were limited when it came to Shore.

But the plan laid out several options that could be implemented for minimal cost that would immediately improve the operations of the building.

In short, Coral provided the operational, capital and strategic planning so sadly lacking. They provided the path to lead Shore out of the wilderness.

Last Sept, 2009, Coral's vision for Shore was debated by council (a three hour debate) and, was finally accepted. Now the City only voted to fund the management portion of the contract. We did not fund the marketing portion or, fund the position to raise money for Shore.

So, where are we after one year? Well, from comments of the Administration, and, some council members, they act like there was failure.

The spectre of closure and demolition has again been brought up. Yet, these very same folks can not tell you how they would close the building. Would they simply board up Shore and let it rot? Would they moth ball it, meaning that it would have to be heated? How much would this cost? How much to demolish Shore? What is the economic impact on the downtown area with no Shore? NO SUCH ANSWERS HAVE EVER BEEN PROVIDED!

The truth is, that Coral's management of Shore has been a resounding success! Projected last year with an operational deficit of 144K, it was only 100K after one year. Revenue is up, expenses are down, new tenants are moving into Shore. Shore is cleaner and more vibrant than ever. More people are using Shore meaning that more folks are visiting our downtown. And that is only the beginning. Coral's plan calls for even more revenue generation through some key City investments, investments that are far far less than the cost of closure and demolition.

Coral's management of Shore is a success. We should back success!

More on Shore and other matters soon.

Buy-By St, Roberts?

The City Should buy the closed St. Roberts church land. The cost of the approximate 7.8 acres is
$647,000. I not only favor the purchase, but, have pushed this purchase strongly. Here are some points to consider:

No tax or fee increases related to this purchase. The trash and lighting fees recently passed by City Council is not going toward this purchase. In fact, those monies are to pay for general operating expenses such as police and fire salaries and benefits. St. Roberts purchase is coming out of our capital funds. Capital funds can not be used to pay for salaries.

Shore is not the target of this purchase. It is not my intent to purchase St. Roberts to somehow
close down Shore. We are purchasing this property as a "pass thru" until the lakefront project is farther along and, we are ready for its redevelopment.

The City has done a poor job with properties on Euclid Avenue and at 205. True. But the problem was not in the purchase itself, but, in not having a plan. With JJR, our lakefront consultants, we have a top notch waterfront planning firm.

And, St. Roberts IS a part of the lakefront planning: Since at least 1994, lakefront development planning envisioned redevelopment pushing south of Lakeshore Blvd. I have always felt that the entire area between the golf course and the marina should be a target of redevelopment efforts.

JJR, our lakefront development consultants, and the "quarterback" of the project believes St. Roberts is a critical piece of the overall lakefront development area.

So, what do we do with St. Roberts once we buy it. Ideally, we would immediately pass it thru to an interested and sympathetic developer. Short of that, the City should rent out the church to an interested congregation. This will allow the City to recoup some of the purchase price while we work on other aspects of the lakefront plan.

Some might say that it is still risky. The risk is minimal. If we are not successful on the lakefront the City can always sell off the property.

Euclid is at a critical time. Our population is falling, and, we are losing wealth. That means we have fewer and fewer resources to pay for services. Therefore, from an economic development standpoint, we must do the marina as a catalyst for apartment conversion into condominiums. JJR estimates that such public investments will leverage 8-12 times that amount in private investment.

Purchasing St. Roberts gives the City options in creating a truly great redevelopment project.
We will have none south of Lakeshore if we miss.

Let me know what you think.

Trees for Euclid

Planting trees does a world of good! Not only do trees offer beauty to and garden, they can save the home owner money. Properly planted trees can cool your home thereby saving money on air conditioning. Consult a landscape or an arborist to select the proper tree and, more importantly the proper location to plant your tree. Chris Grant, our City Arborist can suggest
help for your tree planting questions.

Planting trees is not simply the home owners choice: The City of Euclid plants dozens of trees every year. Most are to replace diseased and damaged trees, or, trees that have been removed for sewer/road work. The City is a long time winner of the Tree City USA designation meaning that we appreciate the value planting and maintaining trees.

As a member of the Shade Tree Commission, I have a great interest in planting trees along our public right of ways. To that end, Matt Sarver, another member of the Shade Tree Commission
have set up an Shade Tree Ad Hoc Committee dedicated to planting trees along the marginal, and in the "infield" areas of the I90/Rt highway interchange. We are currently experimenting
by planting seedlings along the marginal near 260th. If all goes well, and, they take" we will work to obtain ODOT's permission to do a more extensive planting next spring.

2010 Euclid Pond and Garden Tour

Right here in Euclid you can see some of North East Ohio's most creative gardens. Its the
2010 Euclid Pond and Garden Tour. This year's tour is June 26th and 27th. Saturday, the 26th is the special candlelight tour from 7:00 pm to Midnight. Sunday, the 27th is from
1:00pm to 7:00pm. As a member of the Euclid Shade Tree Commission, I want to thank my colleagues and City staff for putting this all together. Proceeds go toward planting trees in Euclid. Tickets are 8 dollars and can be purchased at City Hall. Call Marcia at City Hall for more information (289-2726)

City Council Charter Amendments

The Charter Review Commission for the City of Euclid is proposing additional changes to the structure of the Euclid City Council.

You might ask what the Euclid City Charter is. Think of it as Euclid's Constitution, the very document upon which our entire government rests. Adopted in 1951, this governing Charter has served the City extremely well. The original charter called for City Council to have two year terms with all members standing for election at the same time. Two year terms were clearly patterned after the State and Federal House of Representatives. Each of these bodies still have two year terms.

At the time of adoption, Council was composed of 9 members: one Council President, 4 at large members and 4 ward councilperson. Now, our system is composed of 1 Council President
and 8 ward councilpersons. The change was ordered by the Federal Court to settle the Department of Justice complaint against Euclid. The Federal Court decision did not mandate
a change of the length of terms

The Charter Review Commission is exactly that: a commission made up of citizens appointed by the Mayor to review the Charter of the City of Euclid. Meeting every 8 years, this group can
propose changes to the Charter.

Last fall the citizens voted for one of these proposed changes: changing council terms from 2 years to four. This change will go into effect for 2011

I opposed this change: 4 year terms are great for politicians, bad for the average citizen. Four year terms leads to less accountability. The Founders of the nation felt that the legislative branch, the peoples branch needed to stay as close to those they represent as possible. Two year terms are the way to achieve that.

Now, on May 4th, you will again be presented with changes to City Council:

#25: "Shall Council Members and the Council President, and the Mayor be elected to terms
ending on December 31 and beginning on January 1st

Currently, the Council term ends on Nov 30th. This gives the outgoing Council one more meeting. Under the proposed change, you will have a lame duck council for 3 meetings. This can invite political mischief.

#26 "Shall the Charter of the City of Euclid be amended to increase the number of signatures
needed to file such recall petitions to 25% of the electors voting in the most recent general election?

Currently, the Charter requires only signatures of 15% for those voting in the last election.
It is interesting that the Charter Review Commission in lobbying for passage of 4 year terms
stated that if people were dissatisfied with their council person, they could recall them.

Yet, this proposal makes it harder to recall. So on one hand, we have longer council terms, a longer time that Council DOES NOT have to stand before you. On the other, we now have a proposal to make a recall attempt even harder. This results in even less accountability to you, the citizen.

#27 "Shall the Charter be amended to require a declaration of intent to petition for the removal of any elected officer of the City; and, to impose a 45 day time limit on the filing of recall petitions after the declaration has been filed.

Currently, there is no time limit on the gathering of signatures for recall.

Much like #26, this amendment will make recalling any official that much harder. The result will be a council and government much less accountable to you, the citizen.

There has only been one recall attempt since the Charter was adopted in 1951. From what I know of that attempt, the gathering of enough signatures (15%) could not have been done
within the 45 day time frame. We must remember that public service at the local level, is a decidedly a part time job. Gathering signatures to appear on any ballot, let alone a recall is a time consuming process. We should not make the process so difficult as to make it impossible.

I believe that these three Charter proposals, while good for politicians and political parties, is a bad deal for the citizens of Euclid. Keep your voice, and your options, Vote "No" on #25, #26 and #27

Let me know what you think.

Also, please take a moment to fill out the poll on the Euclid Public Library Levy.

Is Euclid at the top of the (Trash) Heap?

Trash Tax estimated to Raise 2 million dollars per year:

The Cervenik Adminitration sites 14 communites in Lake and Cuyahoga counties that impose a tax on trash pickup. Included are Cleveland, Cleveland Hts, Mentor, Eastlake and Willoughby Hills. Some communites give a discounted rate to senior citizens, some do not. Apartment dwellers are not a part of this calculation, as those complexes have private trash hauling.

Here is a selected breakdown

Willoughby Hills: $276.00
Painesville: $184.44
Kirtland: $183.36
Maple Hts: $182.82
Olmsted Falls: $181.12
Euclid (proposed) $168.00
Eastlake: $144.00
Cleveland: $96.00
Mentor: $84.00
Cleveland Hts: $84.00
East Cleveland: $72.00
Bay Village: $48.00

From these selected cities, Euclid would be about in the middle. Yet, when viewed against our
traditional municipal competitors such as Mentor, Eastlake and Cleve Hts., Euclid would be at the top. Some of this discrepancy is explained by the fact that Euclid has fewer homes with which to spread the cost over.

Center of Dialysis Care Creative Arts Exhibit:

Euclid Public Library is hosting the 5 annual Creative Arts Exhibit from March 2-March 29th.
Exhibits include art work in various mediums by patients of the CDC and the Kidney Foundation
of Ohio amount others.

On Sunday, March 7th, please join the CDC in the Shore Room at the library from 2:30-4:00pm
for an informal opening reception. Light refreshments will be served. Contact art therapist
and Euclid Resident Dawn Knez @ 440-951-3602 ext .121 for more information.

Euclid's Budget: To Tax or Tax not?

The City of Euclid's budget hearings begin Monday Feb 8th at 6:30pm. Other scheduled meetings
will occur on Wed, Feb 10th and on Mon. Feb 22nd. Both also beginning at 6:30 at City Hall. A quick budget primer: City budgets in general are broken down into a variety of categories such as capital funds or enterprise funds and, of course the general fund. These different categories usually have a dedicated revenue stream such as property or income tax. For example, our yearly street repair and repaving budget is funded through a portion of the property tax you pay. Whereas police and fire are paid via income and other taxes. Euclid by law can not use capital money to pay for salaries of police and fire.
The 2010 General Fund Budget: The proposed Administration budget projects a deficit of about 3 million dollars. Given that we ended 2009 with a 1.6 million dollar reserve, if we used all of these funds, our deficit will still be 1.5 million. The City can not run a deficit. Emptying our reserves would leave no cushion for the City and could hurt our bond rating
The Mayor's proposal: Beginning this year, the Mayor is proposing a trash collection fee for those
properties served via the City's waste hauling contract. This cost is about 2 million dollars. The proposed tax is $14.00 per month per household; $8.00 a month for any resident that receives the homestead exemption. In addition, the Mayor is proposing a street lighting tx. Yes, Euclid must pay for the electricity that lights our streets and runs the traffic signals. Projected
cost this is year is 900 thousand dollars. The fee would raise 98% of this cost.

Other budget facts: Many of our employees receive a yearly longevity bonus. Police, Fire, Motor Maintenance, etc. receive such payments. Depending on how long you are employed, such payments can equal 6-8% of a yearly salary. Total cost to the general fund in 2010 is about $769 thousand.

The government and City is yours, let me know what you think. Also, you can call the Mayor's office
@ 289-2751 or e-mail bcervenik@cityofeuclid.com.

P.S. As this is my first foray into blogging and such, I hope you will bare with me. Check back often for updates on other City matters.