New Property Maintenance Manager Position

Monday, a vote passed to create the position of Property Maintenance Manager. At Monday's meeting when our law director was questioned 'was this position advertised?' his response was yes. When questioned further 'you advertised before it was authorized [by Council]?' The answer became no. And yet the job description, salary and individual are ready to go.

This was a position the city had prior to contracting with Safebuilt. When Safebuilt came along several city employees lost their jobs. They were to be given first consideration should a position open or be created within 18 months. It is my understanding that the day after the 18 month period is up; the Property Maintenance Manager begins his job. This would mean that during this 18 month period the job description and person hired had already been decided upon. The timing is obviously no coincidence.

When this was discussed previously it was stated that the money for this position came from other phased out positions. In actuality it appears more like the money is just being shifted as city crew duties were shifted.

The salary is $58,000 and the position will be dedicated to disputes and house to house maintenance issues. So - spruce up or get a letter, then a warning, then a fine...

More Truth in Recycling

This statement is taken from the Mayor's letter to residents in October's city newsletter. "Your donation is tax deductible if your items are of excellent or good quality and if you have a receipt." This is false. It was made crystal clear at the Sept. 8 meeting that all conditions of clothing, shoes and textiles have value.

Tasha's comment to the Mayor's statement: "This is not true.  Your donation IS tax deductible if your items have a resell value and if you have a receipt. Many donation venues (house pick-ups or donation bins) receive donations sight unseen. A blank receipt is given from the house pick-up and many bins have a qr code to receive a receipt. (Yes, Special Olympic bins have a qr code/website to receive a receipt. It is the responsibility of the donor to fill in the receipt amount. Also at the end of the newsletter, the left over donations that do not specifically "clothe the needy" are sold by most organizations collecting textile donations and the revenue from this unused clothing they received from the public is what also funds their cause. The important part of a donation being tax deductible is donating your items to a charitable center or donation bin that outlines the donations are tax deductible."

Truth in Recycling

Oct. 7 was the first day of curbside textile recycling.

During the Sept. 8 committee session, after Tasha Sherman addressed her concerns regarding misinformation given by the city about the Simple Recycling program, she was asked if she would submit a paragraph to be included in the city newsletter or recycling flyer that all residents would receive. She did. It never appeared, but, I have it here:

"Your textiles & shoes of all quality & condition are very valuable to the legitimate organizations that solicit these items to be donated via Donation Centers, Clothing Donation Bins, Missions, Churches, and Manned Donation Trailers, just to name a few. These organizations rely, in part, on the revenue generated from the sale of these recyclable materials to fund their cause, program or mission, locally or nationwide. Worn, torn, tattered & frayed - all of your textiles can be donated to your favorite organization collecting these items, in effect to be eventually recycled. If you have no preference or inclination of where to take your donations or discards, please help us keep these items out of our landfill and place them properly bagged on your curb on the designated waste removal day.

Tasha is a professional with years of experience in the textile recycling industry.

to be continued...

Town Hall Meeting 9/30/2014

Last night was the Town Hall Meeting with Wards 2 and 3, Karen Leiske and Paul Vincent.  The meeting began with discussion of finances. This is the same information shared at the Town Hall held by Tom Henderson and Dave Tadych.  For details on this information contact your council person.

Council would appreciate your input on attached housing as Chapter 1158 is still being worked on.

The deer population was discussed. This subject continues to come up which tells me it is time for Bay to do their research on this matter. This topic had the most comments for the night.  One audience member questioned if Bay has a plan should a deer shot with an arrow in Avon Lake wander into Bay and die.  They did not know of a particular plan.

An audience member questioned the need for storm sirens. Although a couple of council members are in favor of them, the cost is appx. $25,000 each and the city would need 4.

They are working toward having audio of the council meetings available online. Video is too costly. I questioned if there was anything to prohibit Joe or Jane Citizen from recording a meeting and putting it on youtube until such a time the city does so.  Outside of mentioning that the quality or sound may not be very good, they do not want it to be disruptive.

The city is hiring an inspector for $79,000 to bring back door to door and sidewalk inspections. This was stated as an effort to maintain and care for your homes and the community. This was also mentioned at Monday’s council meeting. The money is coming from other positions that have been reduced to part time.  Someone questioned me as to why this did not fall under Safe Built. I don’t know enough about those particulars to have that answer. Again, I defer to your council rep. I do know residents have mixed emotions on this type of home scrutiny.

In attendance was David Greenspan who is District 1 Cuyahoga County Council. He was questioned in regards to aiding the city in working on the Master Plan.  He stated the county does offer assistance and grants for this.  Our Master Plan was last done in 1999.

Gratitude was expressed for Dick Majewski and Conda Boyd. I agree – bravo and thank you! Dick puts in countless hours as a member of the Planning Commission and attending other meetings. His input and knowledge is critical to what keeps our town moving. Conda is also a constant attendee that scrutinizes and questions and offers valuable insights.

It was suggested Town Hall Meetings be held with Council every 3 months and the audience would like answers and follow up to concerns expressed at these meetings. Some said these meetings were better than Council meetings - which they felt can be intimidating. Others stated they are not intimidated nor did they care if they were told to sit down at a meeting :) 

And… the chocolate cake with chocolate frosting was really very good.

More on Deer

"Bay Village police recorded 33 deer-vehicle accidents over the past year." 
http://westlakebayvillageobserver.com/read/2014/09/30/bay-councilman-weighs-in-on-deer-decisions

More Deer

On Sept.2 I asked the question regarding our deer population “Why can't we start a sterilization program now to head this off at the pass?”  Since then I have learned more about deer than I ever thought I would.  According to the Mayor of Avon Lake, the State of Ohio does not permit birth control methods for deer. “Once a deer is immunized, or something is injected into a deer, they potentially can run off and be shot by a hunter and there is concern that people are going to consume that meat and be affected by whatever is in the deer. They have not allowed sterilization of this type in thirty years.”  “You are not allowed to capture deer and sterilize them, because the sterilize procedure is chemical in nature and the ODNR is concerned that if that deer was ever hunted and consumed by animals there could be contamination of meat.”  I am still looking into this information.

Additionally, I have read the cost of capturing and removing the ovaries to sterilize is expensive. Depending on the area you live in the cost can range from $500 to $3,000 per doe.

The Debate and The Deer

With due respect to the residents that are concerned enough with matters to question our city officials, an answer that is always appreciated is ‘I don’t know enough about it but I will find out’. I learned the information below when I was researching the white-tail deer. It was not, however, my intention to dilute the deer topic with questioning how the role of the ODNR could have been misinterpreted, it just happened that way.

  

The deer population was addressed during the Mayoral Candidate debate in October. Mayor Sutherland stated reasons why the city could not attempt to reduce the ever growing deer population. With controversial aspects of culling still being discussed, and in the event Bay should ever consider a deer management program, I wanted more information. Of the things I learned, some were in contrast to what was presented by the Mayor. My confusion led me to communicate with the Department of Wildlife Management Supervisor at the ODNR (Ohio Department of Natural Resources) for clarification.  He was able to elaborate and his answers didn’t mirror my understanding from the debate. Furthermore, no one from the City of Bay Village has spoken to the ODNR Wildlife Manager to discuss the deer population in our town. The only Bay people he has spoken to have been a few residents.

   

Debate Question: Are you looking for a joint effort with our sister cities on deer, bird reduction?

Mayor Sutherland stated she had been talking to the City of Avon Lake, and to be very honest, regarding this issue, this is actually the jurisdiction of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources. They are the ones who can permit a city or metro parks to cull the herd. Certain population parameters have to be met and “according to the ODNR unfortunately the City of Bay Village does not meet them”. She stated further, just to give us an idea, the number of accidents we may end up with in a year - 10 accidents max of vehicle versus deer compared to the City of Solon with 85 to 125. She summed it all up with “and that is how the ODNR judges the population.”

ODNR:  There is no population parameter or deer vehicle accident standard to be met to begin a deer management program. In fact, a city does not have to involve the ODNR to develop most programs. The decision to cull is left to the city. A deer management program, individual to each city, is brought into play and written by the city, not the ODNR. Each program is specific to the city and the problems it faces and the goals it wishes to attain. The ODNR provides the guidance and technical assistance to help make informed decisions and to help a city reach their goals.

If hunting is the culling method, the ODNR has the jurisdiction to enforce statewide hunting regulations and policies. The ODNR can deny a permit for programs outside statewide hunting regulations if they are not comfortable with the program. As best we can tell, Bay did not submit any program to be denied.

Regarding the program: Given the diversity and needs from one area to another, different criteria can be assigned that may vary from city to city. Criteria is established in direct relation to and dependent upon what a city defines as issues and goals. The city itself must first site reduction in traffic accidents as a goal, the ODNR in turn may require particular traffic statistics. ODNR will not simply say – X amount of accidents are not enough to consider a program for your town. Cities tend to want to lay the focus on deer vehicle accidents but the reality in most cases should be on resident issues.  If it is landowner complaints, ODNR will require citizen survey data. If it is for biodiversity issues, they look for vegetation monitoring. Cities are held to providing an amazing amount of work and will be under scrutiny once they involve the ODNR. 

According to the ODNR, there is no one answer or even a good answer when looking at optimum population or “population parameters”. The goal is not necessarily always population control, but goals are tied to the problems the population creates in each individual city, in which case the size of the herd may sometimes be inconsequential. Goal examples: a city can have as a goal of working toward a 30% reduction in resident complaints in area 1 or; no more than 5 vehicle accidents in area 2. Attaching the same numbers to a herd for every community in the state of Ohio does not work. Think of the different landscape throughout the entire state and you know that some areas can sustain 25 deer per square mile while other areas only 5 per square mile. As in the case of an airport area, a zero deer population is the goal. In fact the ODNR stated that a lot goes into determining appropriate levels. 

My understanding:  To say the ODNR looked at the deer population parameters and accident rates of Bay was simply an easy, incomplete and skewed answer. To say that Bay did not meet population parameters is untrue since there are no such parameters to meet. To say, in essence, we were denied permission to cull is in fact – not fact. Contrary to what was said at the debate, there is no basis for citing lack of population and accidents to create a management plan to control deer.

Should the city write a plan and contact the ODNR, yes, they will look at deer traffic accidents if lowering accidents is a part of said goals. Accidents will be looked at relative to your plan; not in comparison to any other city’s accidents or plans such as Solon. But since Solon was the example given, Solon’s herd, is assumedly bigger because the city of Solon has 20 square miles to Bay’s 7 square miles. It stands to reason Solon would have more deer related auto accidents. Still, there is no accident standard to be met unless and until the city outlines that in their goals. 

The ODNR will work, no fees involved, to discuss techniques to achieve identified goals on a case by case basis.  For a densely populated city like Bay Village where bow and arrow and sharpshooting would not work, there are options including trapping.

The link to the Mayoral Candidate debate is here http://vimeo.com/76088904 At 17:35 the question is asked.