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.

The Summer Soltice Update

Finally summer has arrived, with Independence Day upon us. City Council is on recess for the summer. I wanted to take moment to update you on some of the past blog posts.
I hope you find these quick updates informative and helpful.

Trash and Lighting Fees

City Council chose to extend these fees for an additional year. My primary reason for voting "yes" on this matter are the cuts in State monies the City receives. The portion of the Local Government Fund, Estate Tax and Commercial Activities Tax Euclid receives will drastically decline in the just passed State of Ohio Budget. That means layoffs in Euclid without the fee extensions.

Finance Ad Hoc Committee

City Council and the Administration did take up my idea of forming an Independence Financial Review Committee. This Committee made up of business folks and citizens will review how the City raises money and, make recommendations on potential changes.

New Jail Postponed

Given several questions surrounding the organization of Euclid Police Department (more on this in an upcoming blog), the Ohio Police Chiefs Organization is currently reviewing all aspects of the Department. The operations of the current jail, and, the needs for a new one are again being reevaluated. With this project, it is now 6 years and counting.

Recycling

This program is simply not working. What we save on dumping fees, and, what we earn from the recyclables collected does not meet the City's costs of personnel and fuel. While the Federal Energy Efficiency Grant is covering the losses this year, if nothing changes, the City's General Fund is on the hook for these losses in 2012

Downtown Storefront Update

As was described in the Feb. 2011 post, the storefront projects at Lakeshore and Shore Center

in downtown Euclid had significant problems: poor workmanship, not following approved plans

violation of building codes. The Administration failed to catch these defects in a timely manner.

This placed your tax dollars (Federal Storefront Block Grants) at risk of being wasted.

After popular uproar over the quality of the project, the City did cite both plazas for numerous

code and building violations. As of today, the Shorecenter plaza has complied with most of the

issues raised by the City and, work has resumed. At Lakeshore Plaza, the issues are greater in number, and remain in dispute.

Meanwhile, City Council (Councilman Langman) passed tougher requirements for storefront

projects, including a better inspection process.

Great Lake Exposition Center

I'm sad to share with you that the Expo Center has closed. No real reason was given.

Our community is in the middle of some very challenging issues. More on those in the next week or so, but, in the meantime, enjoy the summer.

Dog Park Tales

What is a dog park? Its a fenced in public park where people and their dogs can play together. Dog parks are generally managed by City officials with the help of the park users. Perhaps the key element of a dog park is that it keeps dogs away from other park users such as joggers, and children and those afraid of dogs.

Sounds simple enough, but, this is Euclid, so it has turned into an almost 20 year project.

Here is the tale:

In the early 1990's then Councilman Ed Gudenas and, Councilwoman Fay Miller had several community meetings where the residents of the City expressed a desire for a community dog park. Nothing came of it as the research needed to move forward was never done.

Then, in 2002, the Dog Park idea was brought to City Council again, this time by Councilmen
McTighe and Gruber. A formal resolution passed by City Council on Nov 4, 2002 encouraged the Administration to develop such a park. In the followup news story in the Euclid Sun Journal (1/23/03), a resident from Upper Valley Drive that frequently visited the Eastlake Dog Park, stated, "Its not only socializing for the dogs, but it's socializing for the owners. Its the best thing in the world for the owners and their pets." The City Recreation Department did begin preliminary planning, and, Council members McTighe, Gruber and Miller did pledge to form a citizens planning committee. Again, nothing came of it.


Skip ahead to 2008. Several residents had asked me about building a dog park. While not wanting to step on Councilman's Gruber's project, I thought I would see if we could get this project finally done. At about the same time, our Recreation Department said that a set of tennis courts at Memorial Park would be torn down. I thought to myself, "lets convert the tennis courts into a dog park." Its something Cleveland did at Clark Fields in Tremont with great success. The Memorial Park idea offers the benefit of central location, and low cost (as the fencing for the tennis courts is perfect for a dog park.) Sounds simple, right? But, this is Euclid!

I proposed the idea to Kathy Will, Recreation Director. She then relayed the idea to Mayor Cervenik. In the mean time, I started a petition drive to gather signature to see how much support was out there. We gathered in about 200 signatures in about 3 weeks.

Now, 2008 turns into 2009. Its decided instead of moving ahead with the tennis court idea, that
a public committee be formed to explore the idea. The Recreation Department coordinates the
search for citizens to join the committee.

The Dog Park Committee is established. AnneMarie Finch of the Recreation Department is designated as the Administration's Representative.

Dog Park Committee History: Between 2009 and 2010, the Dog Park committee visits dog parks in South Euclid and Eastlake, holds numerous meetings on pros and cons for the park,
rules of such a park, City liability and, location. The Committee (of which I was a Council Representative) looked at several locations, including Hillandale Park, Hero Park, the police mini station area, Sportsman Park (on St. Clair) Sims Park and Memorial Park. The committee also had several discussions on raising money for the park, including forming a non profit organization for fundraising and care of the park. In fact, the Sun Journal Article of 2/19/2009 on the Dog Park, states that the City was seeking donations to build the park. Final recommendation of the Dog Park Committee was Memorial Park, at the site of the former putt-putt course. This would provide easy access for the dog owners, and, keep the dogs away from other park users.

But, hold on: City Council decides that it would be best for Memorial Park if a Master Planning Committee was formed to look at the entire park. Some of the goals of this committee included:
increasing usage of the park, create better signage and landscaping and, improve and add new facilities for the park. The Park Committee meets for the first time in Novemember of 2009.

The City Council is to vote on the final Master plan Monday, May 16,2011. The plan is a good one and, the committee should be congratulated on their work. The only question, of course, is,
how to fund this plan, but, that is for another post.

As for the Dog Park? It is not included in this final Master Plan document. No real reason was
given, only that "it did not fit" into "their" plan. So, after years of talk, resolutions, committees and ideas, we are at virtually the same sport as we were 20 years ago.

What lessons can we draw from this tale?

First, we should not value the input of one citizen group over another. The work of the Dog Park committee should have been incorporated into the Master Plan. At the very least, an alternative
location should have been presented. Instead, that work was thrown away.

Second, this is another example of Euclid being unable to move forward on any sort of project:
or almost 20 years, the citizens of Euclid have asked for a Dog Park with nothing to show for it.
This is similar to far more "important" issues like the Lakefront, or Shore, Euclid Ave, or new jail, etc: a failure to act and make decisions.

What a sad Euclid tale, indeed!

*******************************************************************************

E 200th Street Stroll

Saturday, June 4th 10am to 2 pm

Lots of Fun for Everyone

Need more info? Contact Sherrie @ 216-481-9044, or e-mail sherriezagorc@att.net

The Jail Lockup

The April 18th City Council debate on the future of the City's jail is a prime example of what ails our town. In the past, I have supported a renovated/new jail facility as a cost saving measure. The item before Council was to retain RCU Architects to develop plans and cost estimates for a new/renovated jail.

Designed, built and opened between 1986-89 the jail was already obsolete from its first design; its straight line design requires lots of staff to operate. The result is annual and chronic losses of about a million dollars per year. While crime should not pay for Euclid, other communities have facilities that are far cheaper to operate.

Euclid tax payers spent millions on the current jail, which is falling apart, but, now are being asked to invest 3.2 million more (estimated) for a renovated/new facility. This will allow the jail to operate with less personnel, reducing our annual operating cost, thus saving money.

This very solution has stared Euclid in the face since the early 1990's. The question is, if the current facility is such a dog, why is the City government only doing something about it now, 22 years after it had opened?

This past City Council meeting sheds much light on that. Unfortunately, because of the Passover holiday, I was not present. But after reviewing the meeting, here are some observations on the matter:

Incomplete Information: Police Chief Repicky states he has been working on "his" plan for 2 plus years. The complete story is that this Administration has been floating some sort of jail plan since 2006. Here is a rough time line:

*On May 22 & June 5, 2006 this Administration proposed hiring DLZ inc to develop
jail renovation plans. They were not retained.

*2007, RCU Architects hired to develop renovation plans. Plans received by Council
February 13, 2008. Study set aside,

*March 4, 2009: Horne Architects presents another plan for jail and POLICE
STATION construction. The site would be north of the current jail, in Memorial
Park. This plan required a bond issue vote of the people in November, 2009. Plans
scrapped

*Fall, 2009: RCU brought back on board: Different set of plans developed for jail;
finished December, 2009, first presented to Council April, 2010.

*January 19, 2011: Another committee meeting, a meeting that almost literally
repeated the April, 2010 meeting.

Missing Data: All the way back to 2006, some members of Council asked for information such as:
* Comparing estimated financial data with other jail facilities (such as Bedford Hts.)
* The cost per day of housing prisoners in our current jail
* Can a new facility be regionalised, shared among other communities and Cuyahoga County?
* Will the Cuyahoga County Sheriff guarantee the number of County prisoners held at our jail?

After 5 years, Council still has no answers, little real data, no actual agreements. I heard only promises of what would happen. No project should be done this way.

Euclid is Reactive: The Council President made the point that the jail only came up because recent City budget issues. She is correct: Euclid takes action only when the crisis is at our front door. Before that, and, what should have you all angry, the City made no moves that I am aware of to save your money operating the jail.

So, to summarize, our current jail was obsolete from the day it opened, losing the tax payers about 1 million dollars per year. Since 2006, the current Administration has consulted/retained three different firms, and, has come up with three different plans. In that 5 year time, many questions have not been answered.

And, perhaps worst of all, while the Administration has drifted, we continue to lose money at the jail. Why is that important? With a much earlier "fix" for the jail; by saving money on its operation, we may not have needed the trash and/or lighting fees.

Jail renovations to save tax payer money is still a great idea. But, the discussion I saw answered few of the questions that have existed since 2006! One of the rolls of any Administration is to answer Council's questions. That did not happen on Monday night. However, I still would have held my nose and voted for this. Its the only way to gather any semblance of impartial information on this project before giving final OK for construction.

***************

Please See the City Web Site concerning important information on the Natural Gas Aggregation Program: City Announces $5.28/MCF Rate for Natural Gas ~ effective May thru October

Taxing Euclid

City of Euclid 2010: trash and lighting fees passed to plug a hole in the City's budget. The promise made was that long term planning would start so that the City would not be caught short again.

2011: Again your City government proposes discussions on long term budget issues. Talk is fine, action is better. So, I have proposed a very old idea: An Ad Hoc Committee that can evaluate how Euclid raises money for City Services and make recommendations for changes. Such a committee should be made up of business people, our City Finance Director, and, a member of the public. Why an Ad Hoc Committee instead of say, the Administration or City Council? For independence and objectivity. In fact this committee should work much like our City Charter Review Commission. Every 8 years this committee examines our City government and offers recommendations that can then be put to a vote of the residents. The committee I have proposed should have similar authority.

Below are just some of the elements the committee should explore

City Income Tax: 2.85% levied on all income, and net business profits. Euclid shares .47% with the Euclid Public Schools. in the 2009-2010 school year, the schools received 5.2 million. Does this rate hurt the retention/attraction of business and residents?

Property Taxes: Better known for funding the Schools, property taxes are also collected by the City for general fund use. Estimated revenue for 20111: 1.6 million. Is our City Property tax burden to high?

Fines, Fees and Forfeitures: I have included in this category everything from housing inspection fees, ambulance charges, to criminal fines and forfeitures. The City has adjusted many of these categories in the past few years to better reflect the costs of police enforcement and inspection services.

Trash and Lighting fees: Under State Code, Euclid is allowed to impose a separate charge for street lighting and trash collection Both are set to expire after two years: should they?

Charter Provisions: The City of Euclid has two Charter provisions worth exploring:

(Property) Tax Reduction: This provision follows state law where levies are held forever to the dollars raised at the time of passage. For example, our Recreation Department is supposed to funded by the same levy that was passed in 1984. Because our Charter copies state law, our Recreation Department receives the same amount of money today, as in 1985. Because the levy money does not keep up with inflation, the City takes general fund money and transfers it to Recreation. (Charter, City of Euclid, Article II, Section 13)

Income tax credit: The City of Euclid give 100% credit for income taxes paid to other communities. So, if a resident works in Mentor, or Cleveland, and those communities pass an income tax increase, because of our credit provisions, Euclid would lose money based on the higher credit given. (Charter, City of Euclid, Article II, Section 12)

Taxation rates: How best to spread the burden to fund government while at the same time encouraging investment in Euclid.

State of Ohio: Changes by the State to the Estate Tax, and local government funds must be factored in as the committee explores changes.

The list above only touches the surface of what must be considered. But, the goal is pretty simple: evaluate and update how Euclid raises money for day to day operations. Make it so that the burden of taxation is shared fairly while also giving the City flexibility to handle any future economic downturns.

As always, let me know what you think

***************************************

Annual Spring Art Show

Presented by the Euclid Art Association, Euclid Public Library

April 9-16th - Public Reception Wed, April 13, 6:30-8:00 pm

*******************************

Mary Mavec Flower Sale

Bedding Flats and Hanging Baskets

Call for more information and orders before April 8th, 216-731-4666

Euclid, Buy Euclid

ABC World News Tonight recently aired a wonderful series titled "Made in America." The premise is that buying more American made goods creates more jobs for Americans. ABC News estimates that 1% more spent on American made goods, a mere 18 cents a day, would immediately create 200,000 more American jobs (See ABCNEWS.go.com for the full series)

Let's take that concept to Euclid, with a twist: Buy Euclid. If we all made a concerted effort to spend more of our money here in Euclid, we can certainly have a positive impact on our City economy. Food, clothing, furniture, home improvement, entertainment, its all right here in Euclid.

From the City's stand point, the more money spent in Euclid the more likely these businesses (especially those locally owned) will make more money. That directly impacts how much tax revenue the City receives.

Greater demand at local businesses means that those establishments will stay in Euclid. And, more likely, those businesses will need more help, meaning more jobs will be created here in Euclid.

We, as a City can not simply depend on one or two large industrial firms for the City's financial well being. A healthy retail and commercial base is critical. So, lets all boost the health of our
retail sector, Buy Euclid.