There are multiple problems that I feel need to be addresed.

1. Arbitrary closing of a request by PWA without pre-notification to the public (except that it is already closed). This is unacceptable. The originator of the request should be contacted, and a concurrance between the originator and the official wanting to close the request should be achieved BEFORE the request is closed. This should be done even if the 'closing' is an administrative issue, that should be done in collaboration with the originator of the request.

2. When PWA (or any other entity utilizing SeeClickFix) closes a request, and it subsequently is appropriate to 're-open' the request, the request should actually be re-opened, not establish a new request. If an original request is closed and then a new request is established, it looks like the job was done, and the statistics utilized for closed jobs is falsely inflated. Further, when (and if) the new request is finalized successfully, the credit for 'two' jobs-well-done' is false.

3. The response above by PWA gives the impression that work was done on the pothole. This is not true. Therefore, the needed response from PWA should have been an apology that the request was inappropriately closed.

4. Because the request was 'closed' and now 're-opened' PWA should put this particular pothole at the beginning of the queue of potholes to be repaired, not appended to the back of the queue.