Let's do some election daydreaming

Sure, the election's a long way away but given that some many upstanding citizens like to talk about all the good council people and all the bad council people, how about we all put on our thinking caps and come up with our "dream team" for city council.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know most of the current city council members are the best you ever could hope for, but let's say they all suddenly succumbed to an illness that they didn't deserve and could no longer hold office. Who then, would you suggest, be on city council. The only rules are they have to be old enough, they have to be alive, they have to be current city residents. They don't have to align with the proper precincts, but if they do, it's even better.
Actually, I'm not sure that applies to all the current city council members.
Anyway, here's my first draft, with the understanding that I get to change the line-up after reviewing other suggestions:

Mayor: Randy Richardville
Council: Hal Weakly, Frenchie Beneteau, Mary Gail Beneteau, David Smith, Dick Micka, Adam Yeager.

Take this one and run with it

I will not run for mayor even if someone sends me tons of money and prints up campaign signs and literature for me free of charge.
I can see the campaign slogan now: "Vote Unknown Observer for Mayor -- One more moron on council can't hurt!"
That probably won't work although a lot of city residents historically have voted blindly over the years.
So, instead, I offer this idea freely to anyone with city council aspirations (and it seems there's a lot of them coming out of the woodwork) so they can have it as part of a campaign platform.
Here's the deal: With what little time the city cops can spare between busting all the drug dealers in town, they should nail as many of those errant teens on rollerblades and bicycles who are riding on downtown sidewalks in violation of city ordinances. Sock them with an $85 fine and -- here's the good part -- make them work off the fine by harassing all the grownup deadbeats who don't pay their parking tickets.
I'm not suggesting kids should have to shake down the ticket scofflaws. They just need to hang around outside their homes or businesses at all hours and be generally annoying, maybe threatening to spray their places with graffiti. All they have to do is promise to go away if the parking bandidos cough up the pesos they owe.
Wait, there is a downside to this that just occurred to me. If the teens hang around too long, they might pick up tips from the parking ticket deadbeats on how to beat those sidewalk violation tickets.

We love them, we love them not

Not to fuel any more rants, but did I read correctly that the Downtown Development Authority will pick up the ball the city is dropping and pay flower-waterers? And pay to rent the city water sprayer too? And the two seasonal workers will be hired through the usual city nepotism pool? Boy, this DDA-city love-hate relationship sure is interesting.
Gee, maybe the DDA also can pick up the tab for a planner while they're at it, and the assistant city manager, and the parks and rec director, and ...
Just a question: Did anyone think of just jobbing it out to a private landscape company. I'd bet it would be a lot cheaper with a lot less liability.
As for graffiti-erasers, I still say a carcass bounty would still be the most cost-effective solution.

Talk about nutcases ...

How about this Virginia Tech shooter? Man, if you're gonna wreak such havoc why not have a real, identifiable cause.
My guess is this guy was on some sort of medication. I mean who else would waste such an opportunity to make some sort of socially redeeming statement. Instead, all we get are rants and ramblings from this guy that don't make any sense.
I guess that all makes sense.

Yeah, I know. Someone reading this is going to turn it into an anti-somebody-in-the-city rant. If that happens, I personally will hunt down their server ID and then hunt them down.

Hey, I didn't bring it up

But a gentle reader of this blog did.
In a comment that was totally unrelated to the previous post, one of our faithful anonymous commenters said this:

"Hey Observer,
Looks like the verdict is in on Councilman Paisley. Ready to eat crow? No violation of the ethics ordinance. Guess you were wrong."

For the record, I never declared the ethics committee would find him in violation, never said that, never predicted it. The closest I came to saying that was that he was probably in violation of the city's lame ethics guidelines. Of course, even that wouldn't mean he would be FOUND IN VIOLATION of the guidelines.

Here was my bottom line on it:
"Just to clarify, if the ethics committee evaporated tomorrow, if Ed resigned from council tomorrow, if the Pope came into town and absolved him of all the sins in his life, he still would have a problem and the chances are it would continue to grow. I know of some of his clients who have bailed in the past and there are some who as I write this are thinking of bailing now. That kind of problem is far more serious than anything an ethics committee might come up with."

That assessment still stands, and the verdict is still out on that one.

This and that

A few observations that defy explantion:
1. What's with this weather. Oh for the days of March when it was 70. It's raining so hard, I'm starting to think wet basement crusader Gary Keck really cheesed off some higher power. It's easy to imagine. Keck has been on the city's case for a decade it seems about how a sewer backup ruins stuff in his mom's basement. The city offered a settlement for the crap, but he thumbed his nose at it and got nothing. So he rants about it in letters, in ads, on public access TV, anywhere he can find a forum. I mean I've seen some really bad public access TV, but Keck's show on the injustice of his mom's flooded basement makes some of Dean Patton's up close and personal tributes to the Custer statue and Heck Park seem interesting.

2. What's with speeders on Macomb St. in front of the hospital. At one point they were talking about putting a light up at Lorain St. but the idea was nixed. That's probably a good idea, but they should put a couple speed traps out there for a week or two or someone will get hurt. BTW, the new hospital front -- ER and main entrance -- is really taking form. It should look pretty neat when it's done.

3. In a previous post, I wondered whether the new fair merchant's building or the new county communications center would get built first. Looks like no contest. It'll be the fair building by six lengths. But the communications building will probably have the biggest price tag.

There always is hope

I plead guilty to accusations that I'm a constant naysayer.
Herewith, I shall try to make amends.
I'll start by suggesting that this Monroe Transfer issue isn't as dire or as critical as many parties might portray it.
I have a sense, and I hope it's right, that the people who run this town can maneuver this in the proper way. It truly will take some innovative thinking, some diplomacy, some leadership and some negotiation. Above all, it will take leadership -- the ability to lead people with opposing views and conflicting goals toward a common, mutually acceptable ground.
And I think Mayor Al and George Brown and the city staff can do the right thing so that when the dust settles no one will be cheesed off -- not the neighborhood, not the history buffs, not the nuns, not the ministers, not the old guard, not the newcomers, not the business people.
I also want to take this opportunity to doff the cap to Mayor Al. As I understand it, he's doing a good battle with his cancer and doing this too. He doesn't need these headaches, but he's bound to have more before it's over.
Even if we don't agree with him politically or philosophically, we should help him if we can, with ideas, suggestions, feedback and at the very least, moral support.
Here's hoping we can weather this as a city.

Council needs to get monkey off back

Geez, what's the world coming to?
Citizens picketing city hall? Oh me, oh my.
The observer has a couple of observations and one suggestion.
Monroe Transfer wants to settle on a patch of industrial land in the midst of a neighborhood.
Neighborhood residents don't want it.
A few residents apparently do want it.
Some city council members seem like they want it.
Some people fear that Monroe Transfer will sue if they aren't allowed to come into town.
Some people fear that citizens will sue the city if Monroe Transfer comes into town.
Some people think this is an issue that goes beyond economic development and really is a subtle anti-black, anti-poor, anti-east end issue.
The truth is this whole issue came up because it's a throwback to the way the city used to be and not what it should be. No right thinking community puts an industry in the middle of a residential area anymore.
My guess is that deep down inside, almost every council member doesn't really want this thing in the middle of town, regardless of how many or what kind of jobs are promised. It just doesn't make sense.
I don't envy the city council.
But here's an idea. Hold a referendum on the Monroe Transfer issue.
If the majority says it's a good idea, go for it. If not, fight it.
Whatever the outcome, the monkey is off council's back, no one can accuse them of ignoring the prevailing sentiment. No one will accuse them of not listening to the public. It would be, basically, the truest form of democracy.
Anything short of that means a more divided community and the sense that council isn't listening or doesn't care what their constituents think.
It might save some city council members their seats and some face and make their jobs a bit easier.
Then, if the community supports the concept, the city has to make sure it controls the development of the site to make it as least intrusive as possible.

Now, on another matter: I deeply apologize for railing against graffiti in a way that spawned some relatively uncivil exchanges. I really believe in the free exchange of ideas -- even in an in your face and brutal or insensitive fashion. What bothers me is that in an effort to create a dialogue about graffiti, the result was some pretty acrimonious exchanges. I would like to think that anyone who posts on any blogs about the city does so in hopes of making it a better place. But it seems that there's a whole lot of deep-seated pent-up hatred that's poisoning this community. If we could aim some of that anger toward graffiti vandals and others who are degrading the community in a real way, it might actually make a difference.