From my observation, Dave Anderson and I have a lot in common. We both suffer from verbosity and redundancy. I fight it all the time in my own writing.
I wish to focus on one of Mr. Anderson’s recent articles written May 25, 2014, and titled Letter: City Committee Openings – Robots May Apply.
If you read Mr. Anderson’s article in its entirety, you will be faced with close to 1220 words talking about the Public Safety Advisory Committee (PSAC) and how Mr. Anderson believes the committee and the Lakewood City Council continually fail.
For an alternate view that does not support Mr. Anderson’s position of our city’s continual failure, all we have to do is boil Mr. Anderson’s 1220 word article down to one word, advisory, which is a key word found in the title Public Safety Advisory Committee. 1220 words vs. 1 word. It is as simple as that. One word, advisory provides the true picture and suggests that our city council and our advisory committees are not failing. We may or may not agree with their decisions every time, but they are not failing us.
The city asks for citizen input via an advisory committee. Citizens, who are not a part of the committee, are encouraged to attend the advisory meetings and to share their thinking and ideas during the public comment period or by submitting their thoughts in writing. The committee meets, researches the issue at hand, reviews public input and then votes in order to develop a consensus. The advisory committee then gives the Lakewood City Council their Advisory Report.
The City Council never intended to turn their responsibility, power and obligation to make public policy decisions over to the Public Safety Advisory Committee. The Public Safety Advisory Committee is advisory. The PSAC does not make decisions, nor do they dictate what is to be done in any situation.
The Committee is only one source of input for the Council to consider. The Council normally has a multitude of other sources of input, all of which can be considered prior to making any decision regarding public policy.
If you are a member of a committee and the Council does not follow your advisory suggestion, I understand it may be disappointing, but that outcome is no failure in the system.
One word, ADVISORY.
Simply put, the City Council is not obligated to act on the advisory opinion.
While I have never considered myself a robot, I think I will apply for one of the openings on the Public Safety Advisory Committee. I believe my background, knowledge and experience will put me in position to do the committee and the citizens of Lakewood some good. I may or may not be selected, but if I am, I plan to do my job, which is to help provide advisory recommendations on various public safety issues. If I am appointed, my job will be to help share public opinion with our Council. I will invite your input through my relationship with The Suburban Times – Westside Story. It will not be my job to make public policy. That will remain the City Council’s responsibility.
Editor’s Note: Would you like to receive Joe’s stories exclusively to your email inbox? Then you should sign up for Instant Joe…
I wish you well Joe in your inclination to serve on the PSAC. I think you would indeed do the requisite research and give due diligence to issues of safety one might expect of a committee with safety as its middle name.
No such no-stone-unturned approach to a review of the Lakewood Police Department’s Use of Force Policy (UFP) however took place within the confines of the confounded PSAC.
Let’s assume for a moment that you read other (a stretch I admit) than your own happy news with the exception of my robot piece.
If you had you would know that the PSAC – as long as we’re numbering words – used all of 79 of them, according to their minutes of December 4, 2013 meeting, in relegating the UFP – which concerns safety by the way – to the ‘fine-as-is’ category.
But dunk tanks, and police department upper echelon who the PSAC is recruiting to sit in them at the upcoming Summerfest: 108 words and counting as the discussion is to be continued.
If you don’t get selected to sit on the PSAC, you might consider volunteering for the plank above the pool.
In the meantime, concerned as you say you are with safety given your background and all, you would perhaps be interested to know that Heidi Wachter (she’s the city attorney) promised the following on October 21, 2013:
“We will review your suggestions (I had spelled out my concern over the three missing statements from Lakewood’s UFP as recommended by the ACLU in their research of similar documents of police departments across the country) and proceed accordingly. We are obligated to employ a process that respects those on staff with the expertise to propose policy and those on our Boards, Commissions and Council who have been appointed and elected to authorize policy. It is clear that you believe these changes will benefit the department and we appreciate the opportunity to properly consider your input.”
But 79 words is all the PSAC evidently had time for in complying with Wachter’s promise “to properly consider” this citizen’s input. Heck, the PSAC had more important directives from the city council to contemplate – like shopping carts which was the consensus of the council (March 17) for stuff the PSAC could do to keep itself occupied given LPD Assist. Chief Michael Zaro wrote in a memo to the council March 10 that “some members (of the PSAC) perceived a lack of direction for the committee.”
It appears then – given public record – that if the PSAC didn’t have advice from the council as to what to advise the council about there may not be anything to advise anyone at all.
Adding insult to injury, Brian Thomas, chair of the PSAC – with whom communication via email and in person was had with regards my concern over the UFP – specifically stated the night of Dec.5 at our Tillicum Woodbrook Neighborhood Association (TWNA) – when asked for a status report of the UFP – that it was “ongoing.”
When it fact it was not.
The decision to dismiss out-of-hand Wachter’s promise to “properly consider” the UFP had been made the night before.
That scenario would repeat at the March 7 meeting of the TWNA until for the first time the Dec.4 minutes of the PSAC would be made available to the city council – and the public – April 7.
So given the above, it’s not about “not agree(ing) with their decisions every time,” as you broad-brushed the issue – in this particular instance yes, they failed us.
So, would robots be an improvement? Say, over yourself?
I guess – if you apply and are selected – we’ll find out.
One word of advice if you are indeed chosen to serve on the advisory committee – the one with safety as its middle name – over Elektro who could, by the way, “walk by voice command, speak about 700 words, blow up balloons, move its head and arms and smoke cigarettes”:
Homework.
Thank you Mr. Boyle! I love your writing and approach to problems. It’s positive, you state your position clearly and with your own words and not a hundred snippets and quotes from others, you provide a compromise and you don’t beat it all to death. As a life long Lakewood resident (a bit over 60 yrs now) I love my city and while I may not agree with all the Council decisions I do believe that their decisions were never arbitrary nor have I felt that I was “failed” just because they didn’t agree with me. There are those who’s glasses are at least half full and others who’s glasses are bone dry. I choose to read the writings and not rants. I look forward to getting the good news that you have been appointed to the ADVISORY Council.