The decay of the vacant apartment building at 1482 W. 117th St. has been going on for some time. It recently sprouted plywood – a great invitation for trouble. This is the second large apartment building on the Lakewood-side of W. 117th St. to be declared uninhabitable by the building department.  They offer a sad bookend to a big nearby apartment on the Cleveland-side of the street that is also completely vacant.

On a brighter note, construction is underway at the corner of Spring Garden Ave. and Detroit Rd.  It will soon be transformed into a brand spanking new Dunkin’ Donuts. Never mind it’ll provide mostly minimum wage jobs and largely unhealthy products — it beats an empty parking lot, right? The new Social Security building will be built right across the street, current site of Lakewood Christian Church

Around 30 residents were on hand for Mayor Edward O. FitzGerald’s August 26th Listening to Lakewood community meeting. The session, held at the Lakewood Armory, was open to all residents, but specifically targeted people living in the Bonnieview, Webb, and the West End neighborhoods of Ward 1. Two ward police officers, Councilperson Kevin Bulter (Ward 1), and Public Works Director Joseph Beno were all present.

The event was filmed by a student at Virginia Marti College of Art and Design and will be posted on YouTube and linked on the city’s Web site.

The meeting lasted only an hour — the Mayor said he needed to pick-up one of his children from football practice.  FitzGerald spent 30 minutes on his standard deceptive immodest self-congratulatory PowerPoint presentation.

Mayor looking to slice $2 million from city’s 2010 budget

FitzGerald said he is looking to cut $2 million from the city’s 2010 budget. This amount is $1 millon more than he identified at the last Listening to Lakewood meeting a little more than a month ago.

Recycling participation rate increases

After months of teasing, the mayor revealed the recycling rate among residents receiving municipal refuse service has increased by 10% to 20%. It is estimated about 35% of homes recycled prior to the mandatory recycling ordinance, so 45% to 55% of eligible residences are now recycling.

Question and answer period

A Northwood resident said she was very unhappy with the curb appeal of her neighborhood — weeds, tall grass, overflowing garbage cans, litter — and said it was beginning to look like the near-West side of Cleveland. She asked the mayor what was being done about it.

“We do have a process,” he said, and outlined the various resources she could use to report problems. “I’ll be honest, it’s a work in progress.”

Another resident was displeased about the seedy appearance of the city between Discount Drug Mart and Warren Rd. She was worried about the safety of senior citizens who need to navigate through groups of shady characters. She said her co-workers know she lives in Lakewood and refer to it as Slumwood. The resident also commented that she’s turned off by the poor attitude she sometimes encounters from police dispatchers when she calls in complaints.

FitzGerald said there have been some disciplinary actions taken against police dispatchers based on how they’ve handled calls. He told the resident to contact him if there’s a problem because all of the calls are recorded.

“It’s a matter of perception and experience,” FitzGerald said regarding the situation near Warren Rd. He’s meet with owners in the area and some of them believe the roaming packs of kids are a problem, while others welcome their business. The mayor said when the police were sent in to break-up loitering groups, he received phone calls from concerned parents complaining about harassment.

The mayor said downtown businesses pitched-in to hire off-duty Lakewood police officers to patrol the area with the expectation it would lessen the problem.

The most pointed question came from a resident concerned about the amount of crime in the city and the alleged success of the mayor’s crime initiative.

FitzGerald said ever since he moved to Lakewood in 1989 he’s been hearing about how the crime situation is getting worse and worse, and more so in the last three or four years.  He said he looked at crime data going back to 1990 to identify trends and found that property crimes and drug crimes have increased while other crimes have remained stable.

The resident asked FitzGerald what evidence he had to prove his crime initiative is working. “[The numbers] are leveling off and and in some cases going down,” FitzGerald replied. “I’m very careful in how I say it.”

The mayor made brief reference earlier in the presentation to the recent shooting near the corner of Elmwood and Madison. He did not mention the reported armed robbery of Moon’s Food Store on August 23rd or the alleged robbery outside of Einstein Bros. Bagel on August 25th, though.

One resident, who said she moved to Lakewood in March from Ohio City, inquired about the status of the money the city got from the state for homelessness prevention. The money needs to be allocated soon, or it might be lost. She also wondered what kind of training police officers receive in order to be able to correctly identify pit bulls. She owns a dog that looks like a pit bull and is concerned about the scrutiny she receives.

FitzGerald said the city was still talking with the county and a couple of other groups to figure out how to disperse the homelessness prevention funding.

His response to the pit bull question wasn’t entirely clear, but he did mention that a DNA test on Otis the Dog proved that it was part-pit bull.

Another resident  complained about a string of 30 houses in her neighborhood owned by a landlord who was neglecting them and renting to troublesome tenants. The mayor suggested she speak further with the ward police officer.

The final comment came from a West Clifton resident who wanted to make the mayor aware of a serious drainage problem near the railroad trestle. The area floods after hard rain storms and creates a giant stream. The mayor wasn’t aware of it, and referred him to the public works director.

With its ample supply of apartments and bargain rental rates, Lakewood is a convenient option for social service agencies looking to house their clients. The majority of these groups run decent programs and draw little scrutiny. However, as was revealed in a federal lawsuit filed last year against the city by the owners of the Hidden Village apartment building  – site of a Lutheran-run youth re-entry program – not everything is perfect. The suit, which was  dropped in July, but is expected to be re-filed, alleged the city’s police and housing and building departments harassed program members and violated fair housing laws.

The Hidden Village apartment building continues to draw attention from the police. They have been called there numerous times over the last two years for a variety of reasons, including several incidents involving members of the youth re-entry program.

The anonymous e-mail

Some Lakewood residents, therefore, are understandably concerned when they learn their neighborhood will be host to one of these types of programs. On June 3, 2009 someone anonymously authored an e-mail to several elected city officials warning them of the impending settlement of a group mental health consumers at Oak Tree Manor located at 1327 Bonnieview Ave. The message was reminiscent of the unsigned flyers distributed when Hidden Village began their youth re-entry program and contained fantastically disturbing claims.

To be absolutely clear, this e-mail contains various accusations that are either totally exaggerated or flatly false. It is provided here merely to give you a glimpse into the kind of hysteria percolating in the neighborhood.

Subject: Fwd: 40 severely mentally ill & drug addicted people moving to Lakewood on Bonnieview!
Date:     Wed, 3 Jun 2009 09:53:08 -0400

Greetings Mayor,

I am sending you this email because I have grave concern about the pending move of 40 severely mentally ill and drug addicted residents of Mental Health Services (MHS) in the next couple of weeks to Bonnieview ave on Lakewood’s west side.  They will be moving from the Treemont Facility.

I  am familiar with the MHS’s/Edens housing program.  I am note sure if the others on this email are so here is a brief description: The program was developed to keep the dually diagnosed, Mentally ILL and Drug addicts,  in stable housing.  This mission allows the clients to *continue using drugs* as long as it is done in their own apartment and out of site. MHS then tries to engage these clients through group counseling and 1-on-1 counseling to stop using drugs.  The residences are supervised during bussness hours by social workers at the site.  The social workers will giving housing in the complex.

I am very worried of how this pending move will affect the lives of those on Bonnieview and don’t think that this should be allowed with a blank check.

All of MHS’s clients have a *Axis I diagnosis* (schizophrenia, bi polar,…) most have criminal backgrounds, all are severely addicted to crack cocaine and alcohol, many have prostituted for drugs. I know of many specific examples of drug pushing, outdoor sex, fights, criminal activities, burglaries, and violent crime that have spilled out of the King James site into the streets and neighborhood of Treatment where this program is currently housed.

MHS’s allows for the residence to continue using drugs as long as it is out of site and in their room!  The goal is to keep them in stable housing.

I realize that MHS staff will be present at the apartment building
during business hours.  What will happen after?  What about all the elderly living in the building,  What about the residences living on Bonnieview?

I think that this needs to be addressed by the city before they move in.  I also think the community of Lakewood need to be aware of this and weigh in.

Lakewood Observer: Please look into this.

Sincerely
Lakewood Citizen

Inquiries to MHS and city met with silence

MHS and to a lesser extent Lakewood’s Department of Human Services ignored my persistent requests for information and clarification regarding claims within the e-mail.

I phoned MHS on June 3^rd and was connected to the executive director’s secretary, Michelle DuPlantier. She claimed to have no knowledge regarding the situation. She said Susan Neth, executive director, was out of the office. I forwarded DuPlantier the e-mail and said I’d follow-up with her later to get a contact. I also e-mailed Lakewood’s Human Services Department and inquired what they knew about the situation.

The next day, June 4^th, I phoned DuPlantier and left a voice message and sent a follow-up e-mail. On June 10^th, I left her another voice mail message and e-mailed Susan Neth with a carbon copy to Chief Operating Office Eric Morse. I also sent Lakewood Human Services another e-mail. On June 16^th, I left yet another voice mail message for DuPlantier and a separate voice mail message for Morse. I left a voice mail message with Lakewood Human Services and followed it up with an e-mail. I called Neth, and her voice mail message indicated she was still out of the office. It was later learned she was in Lithuania watching her child play basketball.

I never received a single reply from MHS. On June 24^nd, the day Lakewood’s mayor hastily called a community meeting on the MHS issue, Michelle DuPlantier finally answered her phone. I asked why my messages went unreturned. “We didn’t want to put anyone in jeopardy,” she said. Duplantier said the Lakewood situation was being “handled from with-in” and suggested I attend the meeting to learn more.

Lakewood Human Services’ response was almost as weak. Instead of giving me a simple return call or e-mail, they punted my request to the Law Department who then denied there was any information available.

Welcome to the neighborhood

Mayor Edward O. FitzGerald called an hour-long meeting at the Lakewood Armory to discuss the situation. 55 people attended, even with short notice. A handful of councilpeople, including Kevin Butler (Ward 1), were present, along with a couple ward police officers and Director of Human Services Dottie Buckon. Several MHS representatives were also there.

Mayor FitzGerald indicated he felt it was necessary to call the meeting in order to tamp down the rumors and explain what was going on. He claimed, somewhat dubiously, the city learned “really just a matter of days ago” MHS was moving people into Oak Tree Manor. “We don’t know everything,” he said.

Mayor FitzGerald said he was “candid” with MHS about his unhappiness over their lack of advanced notice regarding the move-in. He said their clients would be expected to obey the same laws as every other citizen. “Sometimes it has gone well, and sometimes it has gone poorly,” he said referring to the city’s history with these kind of situations.

Lucky thirty

Eric Morse, chief operating officer of MHS, said their 60-person facility had been located in Tremont since 2004, but was no longer suited to house the program. He said the building’s landlord hadn’t maintained it to the health and safety standards required by HUD, who was providing subsidized housing vouchers for MHS clients through another non-profit, EDEN.

Morse said half of the clients were being relocated elsewhere in the region, but the other 30 had “become close friends” and wanted to stay together. 25 clients would begin moving to Bonnieview on July 1^st with a handful of others to follow at a later date.

In addition, Morse said MHS would be leasing office space in the Bonnieview apartment building and would have on-site life skill managers, four case managers, and an unspecified number of program managers. “Vanguard [the property management co.] has really welcomed us in,” he said.

Bonnieview ain’t Tremont

Morse said the MHS program was “very successful” in Tremont. “It brought stability to the corner we lived on,” he said, and claimed that the presence of MHS locations in other urban areas of Cleveland, like Glenville and Broadway, made a marked improvement on the neighborhoods.  As evidence, he said, the Cleveland councilperson in Tremont was fighting to keep the program from leaving.

Later, a resident complained that Bonnieview was already a chore to live on because of the noise and trouble emanating from the bars on Detroit Ave. “I can’t imagine it would be worse than the Tremont bar scene,” Morse said.

Undisclosed mental health issues

Dan Shepard, director of operations for Vanguard – the company that manages Oak Tree Manor, said the building had 71 other tenants and had been cited for only one problem in the past. He said they don’t rent to sex offenders or anyone who has had a felony conviction in the last seven years, though exceptions are occasionally made.

He disagreed when someone suggested that the MHS tenants were a quick fix to Oak Tree Manor’s vacancy problem.

Shepard said he manages an additional 100-unit building in Lakewood and the owner of Oak Tree owns four other buildings. He added, “We don’t have any plans to move-in” anymore MHS clients.

A member of the public asked Morse what type of mental health issues MHS clients have. Morse declined to answer citing privacy issues.

‘Less than ideal’

“This is going to be the beginning of a process of communication,” Mayor FitzGerald said. “We have to do an awfully good job of communicating.”  He added, “This neighborhood is less than ideal” for MHS because it’s not as urban as their other locations.

Councilperson Butler reminded the audience there were no laws or zoning codes to prevent MHS from relocating their clients to Lakewood.

The crowd was generally not pleased about the news of their new neighbors. One younger gentleman who intimated he worked at the Lakewood Hospital emergency room said, “This has got to stop.” He said he constantly sees MHS-type patients in the ER and they’re a drag on the system.

At a Listening2Lakewood town meeting a month later, Mayor FitzGerald said “it is very touchy legally” regarding what action the city can take. There seemed to be some uncertainty about whether or not MHS was going to have on-site office space and if that would violate the zoning code. Mayor FitzGerald said, in general, mental health consumers don’t help the city because they tend to use be consumers of services and not producers of tax revenue.

At the conclusion of the community meeting at the armory, various representatives from the agencies involved in the situation passed out their business cards and encouraged anyone to call with questions.

MHS
Eric Morse – Chief Operating Officer
eric@mhs-inc.org
216-274-3312 (Direct)
216-225-1253 (Cell)

EDEN
Elaine Gimmel – Director, Housing Operations
egimmel@edeninc.org
216-961-9690

Vanguard (Manager of the Bonnieview property)
Dan Shepard – Director of Operations
dan.shepard@cox.net
216-521-8222

Cimperman ‘sad’ to see MHS leave Tremont

As happened in Lakewood, rumors surrounded the MHS program when it opened in Tremont. Cleveland Councilperson Joe Cimperman described the community meeting he held to discuss the matter as being the worst one of his political career. “It was horrible,” Cimperman said.

The building MHS moved into, Kingsway Manor located at 2363 W. 14^th ST, had been a “long time problem” according to Cimperman. It was an assisted living facility and spent time in foreclosure under the previous owner.

He recalled that the room was packed with residents who were angry – stoked by rumors – and shouting out-of-turn. “I was actually physically accosted,” he said. One woman grabbed his tie and struck him repeatedly before being pulled away.

After the initial meeting, however, residents’ worst fears did not materialize. “We watched and waited,” Cimperman said. He held a follow-up meeting six months after MHS opened and aside from himself, the only other person present was the community organizer who had distributed flyers advertising the event.

“Seriously, we have not had one complaint,” Cimperman said. Generally, the only time he’s been aware of police activity at the MHS facility is when one of the clients calls the police to report a crime they’ve observed from their windows, which overlook nearby Lincoln Park. “They are open and transparent,” Cimperman said of MHS management.

Robert Lyons, the current owner of Kingsway Manner, was described by Cimperman as being a busy guy who can be hard to get a hold of. Cimperman hinted Lyons’ candid personality might have played a role in the rift with MHS.

Although the building is kept immaculate condition, said Cimperman, there was disagreement about certain things and “it began a battle of personalities.”

Cimperman said his effort to keep MHS in Tremont was elevated to the cabinet level of Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson’s administration. There was an attempt at mediation which collapsed at the last minute and nothing was resolved by the July 1^st deadline.

“I’m afraid now is that we have a vacant building,” Cimperman said of the 60-unit structure. “How is he going to fill the building up?”

“I’m sad” to see them go, Cimperman said, and recalled that some MHS clients became active members of the community.

Police visited Tremont address 223 times in three-year period

According to a run sheet [see .pdf] provided by the Cleveland Police, they visited Kingsway Manor more than 200 times between 2006 and 2009. The data regarding the nature of the calls is sparse, but includes an array of drug activity, assaults, and mental health issues. There are a handful of apartment numbers that police visited more than once indicating that even a few troublemakers can cause more than their share of problems and make the other 57 law-abiding residents of the building look bad.

In early July, I happened upon the one of the maintenance people at Grace Hospital, which is located next to Kingsway Manor. I asked him what kind of neighbor MHS had been. “They come and go just like everyone else,” he said. He said he’s worked at the hospital for several years and never saw any problems.

How has MHS adapted to Lakewood?

Oak Tree Manor on Bonnieview will never be confused with a nunnery. Police had been called there before MHS moved in and they continue to be called there. Here is glance at some of the more recent incidents:

7/3/09 7:39 a.m.

Disturbance. Apt. 208. Comp can hear a little girl screaming “mommy stop hurting me” Checks okay. All advised.

7/4/09

Complaint. States she received a ticket from NH but she has never been there. Believes someone stole her identity. Receive a notification from Manchester, NH parking dept. which indicated she had an unpaid parking ticket there. Comp said she was never in NH. Comp is going to contact issue agency on Monday to resolve the matter.

7/12/09

Complaint. Apt. 415. Female state her neighbors are harassing her. Male lives in Apt. 411. Female is a mental health consumer that has problems with everyone on the fourth floor. Advised.

7/13/09

Criminal damaging. Someone threw a rock through a windshield

8/9/09

Damage – non-criminal. Someone just broke the window to the entry door in front. 2:14 a.m.

8/10/09

Disturbance. 3:55 p.m. States she was visiting a friend at the Oak Tree Manor and her ex-boyfriend came in and started choking her and punching her in the face. He ran out and she is now with friends nearby.

8/10/09

Disturbance. 1:26 a.m. Apt. 219 male and female arguing. They will separate for the night.

It’s difficult to know if MHS clients are causing trouble in other areas of the neighborhood. However, Councilperson Kevin Butler (Ward 1) confirmed that an MHS client was arrested in July for swiping a statue from St. James. He was spotted carrying it down Detroit.

Lakewood resident Bill Call has taken an interest in learning more about MHS, and is expected to meet with their lawyers today to discuss his questions. He will probably share what he learns on the Lakewood Observer message board.

One needn’t be a dog owner to find a certain degree of amusement in the effort underway to legalize leashed dog walking in Lakewood city parks. A very simple straightforward attempt to let dogs in the park has gotten bogged down by a weird kind of political constipation.

June 19, 1972: A day that will live in doggie infamy

For reasons that are not completely clear, Lakewood City Council voted to prohibit leashed dog walking in city parks on June 19, 1972. According to Councilperson Thomas Bullock (Ward 2), the official minutes of the meeting do not include any hint at the reasoning behind the decision. Someone who identified himself as a longtime Lakewood resident said at a recent committee meeting that dogs were banned because owners were not cleaning up after them in the park.

A review of the Sun Newspaper archives from 1972 and 1973 showed no recorded incidents of trouble, but revealed the city may have been preoccupied with another event the week the ban was passed.

The city was abuzz about an election to determine whether not to permit construction of the Lakewood Center North building. Voter turn-out was stronger than expected and citizens firmly issued their approval, defeating the efforts of a band of homeowners whose homes – 16 in all — would be demolished to make way for the Belle Ave. parking garage.

The ban received three sentences inside the front page section (see .PDF)

What’s a poor poodle to do?

Council officially banned canines from all public parks in Lakewood Monday night. City ordinance now forbids all dogs, including those on leashes, from entering the parks. Owners, however, will be the ones responsible for misdemeanor fines.

In February of 1973 a resident wrote a letter to the editor complaining about lax enforcement of the city’s leash law (see .PDF). A follow-up article published the next week noted Lakewood had 1,125 dog complaints in 1971 and 1,337 complaints 1972 (see .PDF).

Ban reversal effort got off to a bad start

When Councilperson Bullock first expressed his general desire to repeal the ban, he was greeted with quiet disapproval by fellow members of council who wanted to see more details of the plan. Councilperson Brian Powers (At-Large), in particular, was cranky that Bullock didn’t provide any kind of concrete ordinance language.

Council’s consternation with Bullock increased when at the next meeting he introduced what he termed a “placeholder” ordinance that would charge the public works director with the responsibility of managing the rules for leashed dog walking in city parks. Nickie Antonio (At-Large) felt city council should be responsible for making those rules and was actually disgusted enough to vote against referring the matter to the public safety committee. Other members of council voice similar concerns, but forward the matter to committee for further discussion anyway.

July 15th public safety committee meeting

Lakewood’s animal advocates put forth three or four times the amount of energy of any other group in Lakewood. They showed up en masse to oppose the pit bull ban and have organized – with different people, but the same kind of verve – a citizens committee to legalize leashed dog walking in city parks. When the issue was referred to the public safety committee meeting for discussion, Councilperson Mary Louise Madigan (Ward 4) specifically requested the event be scheduled in the evening so that it would be more convenient for citizens to attend. Naturally, the meeting was then scheduled early in the morning.

Approximately six members of the public, councilpeople Kevin Butler (Ward 1), Powers and Bullock, Public Works Director Joseph Beno, Officer Gary Stone and an animal control officer gathered to discuss the matter.

Councilperson Bullock reminded everyone the ordinance he introduced was in draft form. He acknowledged the administration had its plate full with other issues and he didn’t want to add to their list of problems.

Councilperson Powers said he looked forward to hearing from the administration and wanted to have an evening meeting. He wanted to ask the Animal Safety and Welfare Board for a formal opinion, too, though they hadn’t met in over a year. “Apparently, they’ve had nothing to vote on,” he said in a slightly mocking tone.

Councilperson Butler countered that the group had been partly handicapped by a lack of legislative appointments.

Public works director concerned; Mayor okay with whatever council decides

Director Beno said among his concerns about the issue was that some parks, particularly the smaller ones, might be ill-suited for dogs. He said his department only had one person assigned to the parks, and his time was 2/3 dedicated to Lakewood Park. Beno said he hadn’t talked with the mayor about the issue.

Bullock said the mayor indicated he would be comfortable with whatever decision council reached. “We need to take a little more time and deliberation,” Bullock said.

“I still have no idea what we’re proposing,” Powers said, frustrated that there had already been two readings of the ordinance without any firm details.

Bullock said he wanted to lessen the burden on public works by utilizing the citizens committee as a sort of a block watch group to inspire people to clean up after their dogs. Done correctly, he said, leashed dog walking would raise the level safety in the park, chase away geese, etc. If handled poorly, he felt it would result in unpleasant piles of dog manure.

Police and animal control concerns

Someone asked the police and animal control representatives what they thought of the ordinance. “I have concerns,” said Officer Gary Stone, about the inevitability of irresponsible dog owners causing a problem. The animal control officer was worried about people unleashing their dogs. She said depending upon what else was going on, she might not be able to immediately respond to the scene when called.

Butler not sold yet

Councilperson Butler said the leash proposal is an all or nothing decision. “I don’t see this one having a balancing point. It’s a black or white issue. It’s going to sink or swim based on what residents do. We’re just going to have to wait and see,” he said.

Butler said anyone who steps in a pile of dog feces in the park is going to think it’s a bad program. “I’m not sold,” he said.

Powers worried resources are not available

“We’re already short-staffed in animal control,” Powers said, raising an enforcement concern. He concurred with Butler saying, “Dogs are either in the park or their out of the park.”

Though he was the father of the pit bull ban ordinance, Powers described himself as a “dog lover.”

“I’m not opposed to dogs,” he said.

The Citizens Committee to Allow Leashed Dogs in Lakewood Parks

Donna Klein, member of the citizen’s committee seeking to allow leashed dog walking in Lakewood parks, said her group was willing to sponsor waste stations, work with the animal welfare board, and write educational articles for the Lakewood Observer.

Another member of her group said they had performed a lot research on the issue and found much real citizen support.

Officer Stone commended the group for being nonconfrontational.

One resident voices concerns about plan

Marlowe resident Jack Hagan, who doesn’t own a dog, but said he isn’t anti-dog, shared his concerns that allowing leashed dogs in city parks could diminish public safety for joggers.

First, he pointed out what others have previously — dogs are already illegally being walked in the park. He said he sees it with regular frequency. Hagan’s primary complaint was that the narrow asphalt jogging paths in Lakewood Park could not safely handle traffic from bicyclists, joggers, and dog walkers. He felt some dogs naturally chase after objects that are in motion, and was worried people could get bitten.

“I worry it will turn into another dog park,” he said. Lakewood has enough other places to walk a dog, Hagan said, people should “just leave well enough alone.”

Bullock concluded the meeting with the suggestion that the city might allow dogs in the parks on a trial basis for the second part of the summer.

July 29th public safety committee meeting

A couple of weeks after the first committee meeting, a second public safety committee took place in the evening. 22 people attended along with Councilpeople Bullock, Powers, Antonio and Madigan. Cameras from Channels 5 and 8 were also there.

Councilperson Bullock started off conversation about the issue by reading from a prepared statement. He said he was looking for the “middlepath” and supported a “commonsense” ordinance. He felt the current ban was created out of an “overreaction” to a few trouble-makers.

Councilperson Powers said he hadn’t made his mind up about the ordinance and looked forward to hearing from the public and examining how the law might affect the city’s budget.

Police and public works repeat their concerns

Officer Gary Stone said he checked with Rocky River and Cleveland and found they had various problems with unleashed dogs in their public parks. Westlake had fewer problems in comparison, he said.

Public Works Director Beno said his staff isn’t in 90% of the city’s parks. Someone is in Lakewood Park, but not on a regular basis.

Stone said if someone were to report an unleashed dog in the park the call would first be routed to an animal warden. If the warden was busy, the police would send a squad car and generate a CAD report. Councilperson Madigan said she didn’t want to see police bothering with loose dogs.

Citizens committee share information

A bunch of members of the citizens committee seeking to permit leashed dog walking in city parks were seated at a table across from city representatives. They presented quite a bit of research they’d done on the matter (see it on their Web site).

Lake Rd. resident Regina Tomek shared some observations about which city parks might accommodate leashed dog walking. She said she visited Madison Park, but didn’t feel comfortable getting out of the car. Councilperson Madigan said the park has security cameras and great neighbors. “If you ever want to go there, call me. It’s a wonderful park,” she said.

A couple of other members of the group said they thought responsible dog walking would become contagious.

Councilperson Bullock cautioned against having “Pollyannaish expectations” and wanted to avoid a plan that uses a lot of city resources.

Councilperson Powers said he intended “no disrespect” to the citizens committee, but they don’t have any formal authority. Powers wanted to hear from other members of the public that were present.

Feedback from the public

A Detroit Ave. resident said he didn’t think it was fair to penalize everyone due to the careless behavior of a small number of people.

Kirtlane Lane residents Brad and Charmaine Smith own three golden retrievers and live a few blocks away from the park. Brad echoed the sentiment of the first speak and felt it’s unfair to have a complete ban because of the misbehavior of a minority of the population. “We’re not making a rocket ship here,” he said. “How long is this going to take?” Councilperson Powers replied, “The legislative process takes time.” Councilperson Madigan added, “We don’t have a complete draft of the ordinance.”

Marlowe Ave resident Jack Hagan said he still had “grave” concerns about the proposal and many unanswered questions. Hagan wondered how jogger safety would be affected, how many city resources would be required, and what liability issues the city would have if something bad happens.

A member of the public asked Officer Stone what his “thumbs-up or thumbs-down” opinion was. Officer Stone declined to offer an opinion saying he wanted to take things slow and see the entire proposal first.

Lincoln Ave. resident Marge Salopek a 29-year Lakewood resident and 13-year dog owner said she is fearful of dogs she doesn’t know because she was once attacked while walking her dogs. She’s seen unleashed dogs in Rocky River parks. Salopek talked to a Rocky River animal control officer and he said many of the people he tickets are Lakewood residents. “I just feel this is not a good change,” she said.

Parkside Dr. resident Beverly Burtzlaff said she lives next to the park and uses it everyday. She felt it is great as it is. “I would be opposed to changing that,” she said, citing unpredictable dog behavior.

Mars Ave resident Brad Hutchinson, a lifelong dog owner, said people need to step back and realize that not all dogs are dangerous. “We’re just talking about people walking their dogs,” he said. He felt there was no need to involve police resources in the matter. He noted Rocky River might draw more dogs because it has beach and water access. Hutchinson mentioned his father is veterinarian and would be happy to donate some pooper scooper stations.

Detroit Ave. resident Yvonne Rubin said if leashed dog walking were permitted in city parks should would visit them more often and get exercise.

Wrap-up

Councilperson Powers said he wanted to see more firm estimates on what the program would cost the city. Councilperson Antonio again objected to the ordinance because it gives responsibility of managing leashed dog walking to the public works director. “That’s still problematic,” she said. “I really believe council should make the decision.”

Councilperson Bullock said the ordinance was only a placeholder. A revised ordinance taking into account council’s concerns and citizen’s suggestions would be provided at a public safety committee meeting prior to council’s next meeting in September.

A by-product of last year’s pit bull ban is the five-person Animal Safety and Welfare Board. It was created by city council with the expectation it would serve as a sounding board for possible changes in the city’s approach to dangerous dogs. Until recently, it had not met much at all.

Four members of the group, including Councilperson Kevin Butler (Ward 1), along with a few members of the public convened August 19, 2009 to discuss a minor revision to the ban and a potential trap-neuter-release (TNR) plan for feral cats. The meeting agenda also called for discussion on how to revise the breed specific ban.

Trap-neuter-release

Research has shown a city’s stray cat population can be managed through a TNR system whereby the cat is trapped, then vaccinated and spay or neutered  (sometimes called altering), and released.  Mike Stewart, Lakewood animal control officer, provided statistics indicating the city has impounded about 500 cats a year since 2006. 526 cats, many who were pregnant, were impounded in 2008. 18 were claimed. 149 were adopted. The rest were euthanized.

The majority of the impounded cats are brought by citizens to the Lakewood Animal Shelter, according to Stewart.

A TNR program could control the city’s stray cat population and cut down on the number animals that need to be euthanized. An immediate obstacle to such a program is its cost. It costs about $40 to alter and vaccinate a cat. In addition, the city has a law prohibiting residents from trapping animals. Stewart said nuisance laws would make it difficult for him to release animals in the city.

Melissa Linkemann contacted the Cleveland Animal Protective League and learned they are overwhelmed with Cleveland’s cats and weren’t interested in partnering with Lakewood — or any city for that matter — on a TNR program.

Sean Lavin, chairperson of the board, said they needed to do more research on the topic and, among other things,  figure out how to present a good cost-benefit analysis to council. Stewart said dogs absorb more of his time than cats do. Euthanizing cats doesn’t cost much, but it is stressful, he added.

A member of the public mentioned Long Island has an impressive TNR program.

Slight revision to the Pit Bull ban ordinance

Councilperson Butler will present council with a small change to the pit bull ban. His revised ordinance is aimed at unknowing residents whose dog is legal under the ban’s grandfather clause, but unregistered. They will receive 30 days to get their dog in compliance.

He said there are a couple of related cases pending with Andrea Rocco, the mayor’s assistant. Without the revision, the animals would need to be removed from the city. Due to the urgency of the situation, Butler will ask council to approve the ordinance after just one reading. The board unanimously approved Butler’s suggested revision.

Discussion about breed ban changes cut short

It was clear a majority of people in the room were opposed to the breed specific pit bull ban. A member of the public asked Butler — with a touch of frustration and impatience — why he voted in favor of the law. The citizen felt he had not gotten a straight answer from any of the council members. Butler explained that although he received a lot of feedback from across the country expressing opposition to the law, his constituents generally supported the ban. He felt the compromises — grandfathering in existing dogs and creating a committee for further discussion — made the law less harsh. “I thought it was a reasonable balance,” he said.

Butler’s reply seemed to heighten the citizen’s level of dismay. He next wanted to know who was responsible for determining a dog’s breed and how he or she was qualified to make such a decision. The words spilled out of his mouth quickly with a noticeable trace of testiness.

Stewart, the animal control officer, quickly said, “I’d rather not talk about this.” Butler took note and said he joined the committee to look forward in a positive-thinking way. He said he didn’t “want to be attacked” for past decisions. Stewart indicated he didn’t care for the manner in which the citizen asked his question.

Sean Lavin, chair of the board, quickly stepped in and ended the conversation by wrapping up the meeting. The board will next meet on September 23rd at 7:00 p.m.