COUNCIL PREZ LOSES HER COOL

The Setting
October 10^th Council meeting.
Immediately after adjournment.

Council President Cathy Murphy to those nearby:

“We never get into conversation. It’s in my rules. I’ll find it. I’ll have to send it to Mr Hargate."

Murphy then storms over to Councilman Ed Hargate, sitting at the Council table.

Murphy:

"Don’t ever be disrespectful like that again."

Hargate: 

"You are dead wrong and you know it. You try to control everything."

Murphy: 

"Enough, enough, enough! I get the last word."

The Backstory

Half an hour earlier, during the public speaking portion of the Council meeting, 3 residents who live along newly renovated Miner Road raised safety concerns about the 20” deep, front yard open swales installed by the city and their proximity to the widened un-curbed road surface.

Kevin Bailey told Council he has 3 large pipes in his yard along with a swale, and because he lives across from a Miner Road business, he’s seen accidents and had more than his fair share of trucks backing up into his yard.
 Bailey told Council that he thought curbs were going to be installed as part of the Miner Road project.
Council President Cathy Murphy told him no.
Bailey explained:

 “My property has had car accidents in it and trucks gouging my yard.
With the way the swales are, and with 3 large pipes…if there are any accidents..the damages could be very impactful.
To leave it in the state it’s in is pretty unacceptable in my mind.”

Bailey wondered what the city was planning to do to address his safety concerns.
Murphy told Bailey:

"I recommend you contact the engineer (Brian Mader) and follow up with him."

Hargate interjected:

"Doesn’t the city have a responsibility to answer his question?"

Murphy responded:

"No, this is just a commentary period. Also I don’t think Mr. Mader (who has been overseeing the Miner Road reconstruction project) is familiar with this particular situation."

Hargate pushed back:

"This isn’t commentary.
This is an opportunity for residents to ask questions. Residents have a right to get a response."

He got no further. Murphy cut him off.
Bailey then asked whether, with regard to whatever follow-up took place:

Will it be placed on the record for other citizens to see it. A lot of (Miner Road) residents will be interested in seeing it.

A pretty sensible request in my opinion…and with the city’s newly updated website, a pretty easy thing to accomplish.

Murphy replied:

It will be in the (Council) Minutes. It will all be made part of this record.

Mayor Scott Coleman then chimed in:

We can ask the engineer to summarize his responses in a memo to Council.

A memo to Council….not to impacted residents.

Two other Miner Road residents spoke after Bailey….and got similar treatment.

Pat Hopkins, a Highland Heights police officer, told Council that many Miner Road residents thought that the old swales would be piped and that they’d end up with tree lawns instead of reconstructed 20" deep open drainage swales in their front yards.  He said:

"Telling us to call the city engineer is unacceptable.
Council needs to take it into their hands….
I don’t think the drainage issue is a money issue. It’s money the city can afford.
We have a proposal we’d like to present.

We have some options that we want to present to council.

It’s not an engineering decision anymore. It’s up to council. It’s up to council to say yes were going to do it or no weren’t not going to do it.”

Minor Road resident Mike Tyne told Council:

"I know we don’t have much of a tree lawn, so we have a big ditch instead.
 One concern I have is my public sidewalk.
Right now there is 8” of dirt before it goes down to the ditch.
I’m thinking what happens when a snowplow goes down street. There is no cushion to hold the sidewalk up.

Does Council have plans to replace the sidewalk because it’s no longer supported by dirt?
That’s the question I have.”

Murphy announced she was moving on with the Agenda once Tyne finished his comments.
At that point Hargate again went to bat for the Miner Road residents:

"I am trying to speak. A point of order.
When do we intend to discuss the Miner Road problem?"

Murphy responded:

We will talk to (engineer) Mr. Mader.

Hargate retorted:

"This is a public Council meeting.
I don’t know why you don’t want to discuss it at a public council meeting.”

Murphy:

"We will follow up. Mr Mader needs to go onsite. We don’t have enough information."

Hargate:

"But you don’t let the engineer answer those questions.
I’m asking when you intend to discuss this issue."

Slamming the door shut, Murphy told Hargate:

"We don’t know. We are moving on."

And move on they did….except for Murphy...leading to the post-meeting dressing-down of Councilman Ed Hargate described above.

WHAT’S THE HARM IN LISTENING?
I was pretty impressed that the Miner Road residents didn’t come to the Council meeting just to complain.
They had come up with ideas and some possible solutions.
All they wanted was an opportunity to discuss them with Council.

A pretty reasonable request in my opinion….but one that, for whatever reason, Murphy was disinclined to grant.

Maybe the Miner Road residents’ suggestions are impractical or impossible.

But it certainly wouldn’t hurt Council to listen to them.
Which leads to the question:

Why was Council President Murphy so against engaging in a discussion and dialogue with the Miner Road residents?

HELLO/GOODBYE BUSINESSES

The new Chipotle on Wilson Mills Road (in front of Kohl’s) is now open.
Too bad they weren’t able to open a month ago.

Residents will have to wait until next spring to dine al fresco on the new Chipotle patio.

There’s been a large “for rent” sign in front of the small business strip near the Bishop/Wilson Mills intersection.
Apparently the beauty salon is moving to another location.
The ice cream shop in the same strip is still there---it just has a new name.

The new signage on the business strip looks great, as does the landscaping.
Nice to see members of the city’s business community investing in their properties and making them look nice.

The Birds!

The warm fall weather brought of flock of what looked like turkey vultures to my street this week.

Here's a beauty shot of two of them, strutting their stuff.

THE MOST WONDERFUL TIME OF THE YEAR…..NOT!

I confess.

I hate election season.

Like some holidays, election season seems to start earlier and earlier each year.
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised…. not when local retailers start trotting out Christmas displays along with their Back-To-School shopping promotions.

I hate the annoying (and many times incomprehensible) robo-calls, the mailbox-congesting, over-sized glossy postcards, and yard signs promoting candidates who don’t even live in our city.

Most of all I hate the political game playing.

We’ve certainly seen our share of that in Highland Heights.
For some ego-driven politicians, winning isn’t sufficient.

They have to win BIG to show the world (I guess) just how POWERFUL, IMPORTANT and ADMIRED they are.

They remind me of football coaches who, facing clearly over-matched opponents, refuse to put in their 4^th string and opt to run up the score instead.
To all that I say:

Bah Humbug!

THE MAYORAL RACE
It’s hard to notice, but there’s a mayoral race in Highland Heights this year.
At least that’s what the official ballot shows.

If signs count, Mayor Scott Coleman has already won the race.

Coleman, who has an extensive war chest, has papered the city with red-white-and blue (of course) re-election signs.

You’d think there was an actual contest going on…and that Coleman was fighting for his political life.

He’s not.

On October 7^th, NEOMG reporter Sara Dorn posted a story, detailing the mayoral candidates’ endorsement interview.
http://www.cleveland.com/hillcrest/index.ssf/2015/10/highland_heights_mayoral_candi_1.html\

                                          Photo by Cleveland.com

http://www.cleveland.com/hillcrest/index.ssf/2015/10/highland_heights_mayoral_candi_1.html\

Coleman’s opponent, Mike Calabrese, is a sincere and well-intentioned libertarian who apparently embraces a no government, every-man-for-himself philosophy.
Dorn reports:

“Calabrese said he is miffed by ordinances that regulate backyard fires and prohibit residents from parking vehicles with signage in their driveways.,,, (and) claims city officials violate citizens' Fourth Amendment rights, which protect from unlawful search and seizure, when they enforce residential ordinances …“

Who needs ordinances?

Let chaos reign!

Zoning ordinances and other “quality of life” regulations are part and parcel of living in an upscale suburban community like Highland Heights.
Residents give up a little bit of personal freedom to benefit their neighbors and for the good of the community at large.

Yet some people…..Calabrese and, come to think of it, maybe the Rutland Drive pool owners with the monstrous, over-sized deck as well--- apparently think they should be entitled to the benefits of living in our wonderful city without having to live by its rules.

The kind of “constitutional republic” Calabrese envisions for our community already exists elsewhere.

There are places in this country (Texas, for example) that don’t have any zoning laws.
Property owners can do whatever they like on and to their property, without regard to the impact their actions might have on others.
Which makes me wonder:

Might Calabrese be happier (and more successful) running for mayor there?

RUTLAND DECK DISPUTE: POLITICAL GAME PLAYING?

The dispute over the monstrous, free-standing deck that Rutland Drive residents installed 11 feet from their rear property line began in May of 2014.
Since that time, two administrative hearings have been held and a lawsuit has been filed.

The City---with Council’s blessing---is fighting the suit tooth-and-nail.
Leaving Highland Heights taxpayers to foot the legal bill…again.

Law Director Tim Paluf and the Rutland Drive residents’ attorney have already filed several motions.
They asked the court to dismiss the case and to throw out the evidence that the aggrieved neighbors filed to supplement the sparse "official" record that the city filed with the court.

 The trial judge told them no.

 He wants to look at all of the evidence and decide the case on the merits.
On August 31^st, the judge set a briefing schedule.

After all this time and all the prior proceedings, it should be abundantly clear to everyone involved what the legal and factual issues are.  

The parties should be well-prepared to present the court with their written arguments.
The neighbors’ attorney filed his brief on time on September 25^th.
Paluf and the Rutland Drive residents’ attorney were ordered to file their responsive briefs on October 9^th.
Instead of filing a brief, Paluf filed a motion on October 7^th seeking an “extension of time”.
How long an extension did he seek?

Long enough to guarantee that a decision won’t be rendered in the lawsuit until after the November 3^rd election.

Paluf wants to wait until October 26^th to file his brief…which will push the entire legal process well into November.

Paluf’s excuse for needing more time?

“..absence from (his) office and professional calendar..”
                                and
”…the extensive filing by the Appellants in the application of Ohio Rev. Code Section 2506 on appeal..”

Was he visiting his Florida pad..is that why he was “absent” from his office?
Paluf doesn’t say.

But it’s a bad sign for the City if---at this late date---Paluf is actually surprised by either the evidence or the legal issues in this case.

FOLLOWUP:  HERITAGE HOMES POSTCARD
My last blog included a picture of a postcard sent out by the Cleveland Restoration Society, which declared that the Heritage Home Program  was being operated “in partnership with Mayor Coleman”.

I wondered: was it intended---implicitly or explicitly---as a political endorsement?

In an email, Michael Flowers, a Heritage Home Program Assistant, told me this:

“We are not affiliated with any political party and do offer endorsements to candidates.  The wording of partnership with the mayors on our postcards simply refers to the fact that the mayor’s and councilman of participating communities are often involved with the decision for the city to participate in the program.”

I pointed out to Flowers that local politics can be tricky and that, in singling out a mayor by name,  there was a chance his group might slight and offend other officials who were, in fact, the Program’s biggest boosters.
Flowers responded:

“…we do not offer endorsements to candidates and we do not get involved in local politics…We do two mailing every year regardless of the timing of political elections…”

So...what the Program representative says:

 They don’t get involved in local politics or offer candidate endorsements and they acknowledge that both mayors and councilmembers are often involved in making the decision as to a city’s participation in the program

What the program actually does:

Send out a postcard, during election season, naming and spotlighting (only) the mayor---by name---as a Program “partner”

What do you think?

Is this Obliviousness? Political Naiveté?.... Or something else?