Main Street Lights
Printed From: MiddletownUSA.com
Category: Middletown City Government
Forum Name: City Council
Forum Description: Discuss individual members and council as a legislative body.
URL: http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3971
Printed Date: Jun 01 2024 at 10:02pm
Topic: Main Street Lights
Posted By: rngrmed
Subject: Main Street Lights
Date Posted: Jul 04 2011 at 1:26pm
| I only caught a small portion of the council meeting. From what I saw, the rest of the town is going to buy special light posts for the residents on Main street? Is this correct? |
Replies:
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 05 2011 at 1:26am
|
Ranger,
Not exactly.
Ohio law allows the residents on a street to pettition a city to install "street lighting". If 60% or more of the property owners, by frontage, have signed the petition, city council may decide to install steet lighting and assess the costs to ALL property owners (whether they signed the petition or not) according to the frontage they own. (I believe that the City pays for the frontage-foot equivalant at street or alley intersections, but I am not 100% certain of this.)
Now, there is already EXISTING street lighting on South Main Street, but the good residents (including Mr. Kohler and Mayor Lawrence P. Mulligan, Jr.) on that street feel that the same law that allows residents to petition for "street lighting" allows them to petition for demolition of existing lighting and replacement with decorative street lampposts and faux gas light globes.
Since the City of Middletown owns some property on South Main, we taxpayers will be on the hook for our "share" of these decorative items.
Three weeks ago at the last council meeting this amounted to "$7,000+". This week it is already up to "$9,900"!!! (Isn't it great how they used the old retailer's trick and kept it under $10K??? I'm surprised it wasn't $9,999.99.)
Who knows how high the taxpayers' share will be before it's over???
I guess city council thinks that there is plenty of money to spare in the city budget!!! ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: rngrmed
Date Posted: Jul 05 2011 at 8:05am
|
So the City can afford this and other nickel and dime (less the $10k) but we are going to lay off firefighters and police officers??? The City wants to impose new taxes to cover expenses, but we are buying decorative lamps? Really?? Sure property owners are being assessed too, but this is just 1 project. How many other unneccessary projects are they pulling this scam on? |
Posted By: SupportMiddletown
Date Posted: Jul 06 2011 at 11:21pm
|
$10,000 is a good deal for the city to get streetlights in the historic district. Go to Hamilton or Springfield; These cities have multiple historic districts that have had period streetlighting for years, installed and maintained by the city. If the residents are willing to carry the cost to get this public improvement completed, I think residents should be applauding, not complaining over the small public portion. |
Posted By: Richard Saunders
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 4:02am
|
My Dear Supporter: Of course you are correct. The ill-mannered detractors are thankless when these best of our city ask so little of them. The common-folk of the city should be willing to do so much more for these who lend so much grace and elegance to elevate the overall wretchedness of this otherwise miserable pisspot of a burg. Why, even slashing more of the fire-watch and the constabulary would be reasonable, if it would fund a nice garden for the gentry to enjoy in their common areas. The street urchins don’t appreciate the parks any way. Tear out the play toys, I say, and provide a strolling area properly tended with guarded gates. More elaborate fountains where the noble few might share the evening breezes, safe from the churlish masses, would be a more proper use of the public treasure. I say that you, SupportMiddletown, would be the proper person to oversee such an effort, with a handsome stipend from the City, of course. Bring this matter before the Mayor and the proper authorities post haste, Sir! (But do it at one of the private meetings, please, lest the peasants revolt.) I remain
Your servant
R. Saunders
P. S.: I am certain that a petition could be arranged, if absolutely necessary. Walls and gates for each of the manors would be another splendid thought. With conscripted labor, we shan't be forced to suspend the Widows' & Orphans' Fund for more than a few score years.
|
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 10:32am
|
Mike |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 11:27am
|
Will those that have property facing another street but their side yards are on |
Posted By: acclaro
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 12:04pm
| Vivian, all of this a moot point. The lamps are Larry Mulligan's vision, the basis for his 2nd term. He's building the firewall around his historic area with Ms. G's and council's help. That's what his second term is all about. It could cost $100,000 and it would not matter. $10,000 is too much for anything else, but when it benefits those building the firewall. No more complicated than that. As it is, as it has been, as it will be in the fture, until 4th/ 5th generations of residents are gone, reliving the past, and the only spent is protectig 1) the Beast 2) the firewall around the historic area. They'd spend $1,000,000 on this unchecked, but not a dime for a pool. Probably have Pratt negotiating ith AK and Wainscott to use the remaining $18,000 in pool fund $$$ to put in Victorian Gables and oak porches for everyone on Main. |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 12:41pm
|
I have often wondered why none of the houses that are located on |
Posted By: acclaro
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 1:09pm
|
ANSWER to above:
1) net worth $$$
2) MD, phD, MBA next to name
3) Who Who in Middletown yearbook
4) School attended
5) Closeness to library---who is running LM's re-election?
|
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 4:07pm
First: If some of the other cities put a roof over their downtowns, should we do likewise??? If some other cities try to make a lake out of their rivers without securing all necessary regulatory clearances, should we do likewise??? If all of the other kids jump off of a cliff…??? SHEESH!!! Next, I’ve been to Hamilton and Springfield…have YOU??? And I’ve been to downtown Middletown, which also has olde tyme lighting. Exactly WHAT has “period lighting” gotten ANY of these places, EXACTLY??? Finally, I DO applaud these folks doing period lighting, or any other thing that THEY want to do that THEY think improves THEIR property!!! I just think that THEY should do it with THEIR money and not everyone ELSE’S. Can’t you understand that the city is going broke?? OUR municipal debt is increasing every year!!! OUR children are already heavily in MUNICIPAL debt for DECADES. We are being FORCED to cut back on ESSENTIAL municipal services!!! And we will likely be FORCED to take on HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of more municipal debt (separating combined sewers and fixing our other crumbling infrastructure) in the very near future!!! We have THOUSANDS of skilled and semi-skilled trades people, and thousands more unskilled workers in this town who will have very grim prospects for employment, and who will not be able to afford to move away. When these people have no way to feed their families, except to steal from YOU, and we have been forced to lay off the last of the police, do you plan to call a DECORATIVE lamppost for assistance??? So, fine…buy all of the decorative lampposts that YOU want, if you think that is the wise thing to do, but PLEASE…do so with YOUR own money!!! The city can NOT afford it!!! The rest of us can NOT afford to decorate YOUR home!!! ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
SupportMiddletown wrote:Posted By: nezitiC nwotelddiM
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 5:56pm
| If I am not mistaken the petitioners are willing to pay for 100% of the costs. |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 6:31pm
No need for that. SupportMiddletown is so convinced that this is such a "good deal" that I am certain he/she will be stepping forward with a personal check for the full public portion of the costs.
This is correct, isn't it, SupportMiddletown??? You will be putting your money where your mouth is, won't you??? ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: viper771
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 7:30pm
Ms. Moon, I asked that same question myself. I looked into it as well at the library. When the district was setup in the 1970s, it was going to include more houses on Yankee Road (I think there are only a couple) and also the nice houses on Vanderveer. But, I think the owners at the time opted out (I think some houses were rentals) or for whatever reason, none of the future parts of the historical district were never added on unfortunately. I wish some were put into the historic district, since a few have fallen into such decay :( There is a yellow book in the reference section in the library about the historic district which includes all the info.
|
Posted By: viper771
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 7:34pm
Yeah, that is what I understood at well. If that is the case, I think it would make the area look better, while at the same time not costing anyone else money...But, IF the taxpayers do have to front the money, that is something that can wait until later.
|
Posted By: ground swat
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 7:52pm
| Mr. P- I did not see all of council and since we don't belief in less taxes in this town and I've been working did anyone say that this expense would be and will be on the parcel owners only? |
Posted By: TudorBrown
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 8:14pm
Yes!  SupportMiddletown, put your money where your mouth is! |
Posted By: Voice of Reason
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 8:32pm
|
I saw some of this discussion at the council meeting, and from what I've gathered it seems that the city will be on the hook for somewhere between $3K-$9K for the property it owns (I think Old South Park?) as part of this project. Is this really worth getting so excited over the city spending 4 figures worth of taxpayer dollars?
I guess I'm baffled as to the logic behind the opposition to this--if the property owners on S. Main want decorative lamps, or new sidewalks, or a re-paved street, or potted plants, or a trolley, or a bike path, or any other "improvement" that they deem appropriate, and are willing to pay for it themselves, then what, exactly, is the big deal?
I would be glad to chip in a little more in taxes to re-pave my street and get new sidewalks put in, but am I forbidden from doing so if the city owns property on my street? By that logic, of course, the city can't spend any money that doesn't directly benefit ALL citizens of Middletown. No money for Sunset, since that only benefits the swimmers; no money for the sidewalks, since that only benefits the walkers; no money for the seniors, since that only benefits the elderly. Taken a bit further: no money for the police, since that only benefits those who want police protection (and there are certainly some ardent 2nd amendment supporters in this town who believe they could do without the police!); no money for the fire department, since that only benefits those whose houses burn down (an even smaller number than those who live on S. Main, I would reckon, even though we spend millions on fire protection).
So there you have it--if we restrict city expenditures to only those services that benefit all Middletonians, can anyone tell me how, exactly, we would spend money on anything? It seems that there are a number of people on this forum who oppose anything the Mayor does simply by virtue of his address--some of you are convinced that everything is a conspiracy to return Middletown to the 1800's. I don't live on S. Main but I do freely admit that I admire their willingness and desire to improve their neighborhood, to make it more attractive to live there, to make it more unique and worth preserving, which is so unlike much of the cheap, disposable, cookie-cutter housing development that occurs today.
So let me pose this question--would you pony up an extra $20 per month to get your street re-paved? If you would (and I certainly would; I would help chip in to help pay for improvements to a number of streets that I don't live on just to help make Middletown more sightly), then you can't legitimately oppose this petition by the S. Main people. Frankly, it's unbelievable to me that we would stand in the way of improvements--PAID FOR BY THE PEOPLE SIGNING THE PETITION-- because the city will spend mere pennies out of its budget to cover the portion that they're obligated for under the petition.
If you ever wonder why Middletown has deteriorated so much in the past 30 years, here we have a prime example--the slum landlords and working poor didn't sign the petition (but there was still more than 60% who did) and people are wringing their hands over $9,000 the city might spend (over about a decade or two, I believe) to buy a couple of street lights as their share of the bill. There isn't a person on this forum who hasn't railed against Section 8, and if this petition is one tool that makes it less attractive for Section 8 slumlords to operate in Middletown (because of the higher property taxes) then you should all be supporting it.
I do try to support Middletown as best as I can, but it seems that all too often the lowest common denominator of people end up getting the support of people on council (Scott-Jones and Laubach in this particular debate), and as a result Middletown continues its downward spiral. Maybe if council took up measures that raise the bar for people, maybe if they demanded that people keep up the appearance of their homes and businesses (like Mason, West Chester, Montgomery, etc. do), maybe if we didn't try to attract every derelict in Butler County through Section 8, perhaps Middletown would be a nicer town with better schools and stable home prices. But instead we bicker over pennies and favor the slum landlords and lifelong welfare cases over people that seem to genuinely care about their neighborhoods, and we wonder why people think of Middletown as a ghetto/white trash city. ------------- "Ask not what your country can do for you..." JFK |
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 9:39pm
|
"maybe if we didn't try to attract every derelict in Butler County through Section 8, perhaps Middletown would be a nicer town with better schools and stable home prices. But instead we bicker over pennies and favor the slum landlords and lifelong welfare cases over people that seem to genuinely care about their neighborhoods, and we wonder why people think of Middletown as a ghetto/white trash city".
Voice of Reason  I LIKE THIS OBSERVATION.
"Maybe if council took up measures that raise the bar for people, maybe if they demanded that people keep up the appearance of their homes and businesses (like Mason, West Chester, Montgomery, etc. do)", ONE PROBLEM WITH THAT IMO......PEOPLE IN MASON, WEST CHESTER AND THE MORE AFFLUENT COMMUNITIES HAVE THE MONEY/PRIDE/CLASS TO MAINTAIN THEIR HOMES. YOU JUST MENTIONED MIDDLETOWN IS CONSIDERED A GHETTO/WHITE TRASH CITY AND, GIVEN THAT FACT, SOME ARE LOW INCOME WITH NO DISPOSABLE CASH TO MAINTAIN A PROPERTY. DON'T THINK YOU CAN RAISE THE BAR AND GET PEOPLE WITHOUT MONEY OR CLASS TO BE ABLE OR WANT TO PARTICIPATE. SOME LOWER INCOME PEOPLE HAVE PRIDE WHILE BEING POOR AND TAKE CARE OF WHAT LITTLE THEY HAVE. I WOULD IMAGINE THE MAJORITY THOUGH, HAVEN'T BEEN RAISED TO TAKE CARE OF THINGS OR UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE PRIDE. THEIR MOMMA AND DADDY DIDN'T GIVE THEM EXAMPLES OF PRIDE OR SHOWING A LITTLE CLASS TO LIVE BY GROWING UP. VOICE, I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT THERE MAY BE A PERCEPTION THAT MULLIGAN, KOHLER AND THE REST OF THE S. MAIN ST. CROWD ARE RECEIVING PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT (AS HAS THE HIGHLANDS HISTORIC DISTRICT) AS TO THE ACTIVITIES DIRECTED TOWARD THEIR AREA OF THE CITY, WHILE THE REST OF US ARE A DISTANT TENTH ON THE LIST OF NINE ON IMPORTANCE. THERE MAY BE A PRIORITY/SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON PLEASING THESE PEOPLE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE REST OF THE CITY. IT APPEARS THAT WHATEVER THESE PEOPLE WANT THEY GET AND IN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME. WHATEVER THE REST OF US WANT, GETS NO ATTENTION NOR EFFORT THROWN AGAINST WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS. IT IS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF PLEASING THE SMALL LITTLE BAND OF INFLUENTIAL PEOPLE AND FRIENDS OF CITY HALL AND IGNORING THE REST, A PRACTICE THIS CITY EXCELS AT. IT IS A MATTER OF KEEPING IT "ALL IN THE FAMILY" WHEN MONEY IS SPENT IN THIS CITY. AND YES, $20 BUCKS A MONTH TO HAVE MY STREET PAVED WOULD BE A GOOD DEAL DEPENDING ON HOW LONG I WOULD HAVE TO PAY. THERE MUST BE AN END TO THE PAY PERIOD WHICH YOU DIDN'T STIPULATE IN YOUR COMMENT.  NONE OF THIS SHOULD BE HAPPENING THOUGH. IF THE CITY HAD SET UP THE BUDGET BACK IN THE 80'S AND LEFT THE MONEY IN THE STREET REPAIR FUND INSTEAD OF STEALING IT TO PLACE IN THE BLACK HOLE CALLED THE GENERAL FUND, THE CITY WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE STREET REPAIR SCHEDULE AND BEEN WAY AHEAD OF THE GAME BY NOW. PAST AND CURRENT COUNCIL'S HAVE NEGLECTED TO RETURN TO A PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM FOR STREETS AND NOW WE ARE ALL PAYING THE PRICE FOR THEIR INEPTNESS. THEY ALWAYS FIND A WAY TO DIVERT ANY MONIES INTO FUNDS OTHER THAN THE STREETS.
|
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 11:02pm
|
maybe if the city admin focused on bringing meaningful employment to the community, citizens could afford to improve their properties or at least hold on to them.
maybe if econ dev and comm revitalization were functional in actually revitalizing the community and developing a real local economy instead of blowing taxpayer funds on dead end losers and stipends for the historical districts.................
as Mike P mentioned, downtown Hamilton and Springfield might have decorative streetlights(like the former downtown area of Middietown), but that is about all that they have. Ever been to Lima?
|
Posted By: LMAO
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 11:19pm
|
Why should we taxpayers have to foot the bill for Mullethead and Kohlers lights?Anyone that says we wont have to foot the bill for them and maintance I have some swamp land for sale.What makes them so damn special? Maybe Mullethead Mulligan can ask his golfing buddy McCoy to donate them.
|
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 11:51pm
|
Voice: Apparently you are baffled, so please allow me to try to explain it to you, point-by-point, as clearly as I can:
I won’t comment on the remainder of your post, since I believe that you were just venting, and we all need to vent once in a while. Yet I must point out that I might look at this differently if this area of Main Street presently had no street lights!!! But that is NOT the case, and many people seem to be conveniently ignoring the fact that part of the cost to be borne by the taxpayers includes demolishing perfectly good existing street lights!!! What would you say next year, if these same folks decide that their neighborhood would look nicer if the street had nice, olde tyme brick pavers??? What if they were petitioning to tear up brand new, smooth-as-a-baby’s-bottom asphaltic concrete pavement to be replaced with fancy olde tyme brick pavers, while YOU bounce your car up and down YOUR street back-and-forth to the alignment shop every week, and the taxpayers’ share was $500,000? Would your attitude be the same??? Ridiculous??? Of course!!! But the principles are the same. ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 11:58pm
|
Oh, Voice, one more thing:
Don't count on getting your street paved for $20/month. You will be lucky if $20/month covers your curb and sidewalk repair assessment. I doubt that you'll believe me, but why don't you talk to a contractor. It'll be scary how much it'll cost you if you petition to have your street re-paved. ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: viper771
Date Posted: Jul 08 2011 at 4:58am
I have been to Lima Spider..many times. There are bad parts of the city, but there are also good parts too. It happens to any city at that size, which is about the size of Middletown, if I am not mistaken. In any mid-large city, there will always be good and bad parts. There are parts of California that are that way too.. The good parts are usually so expensive to live in that it keeps the trashy people out..and by expensive, I mean REALLLY expensive.
|
Posted By: ground swat
Date Posted: Jul 08 2011 at 7:50am
| Getting excited over, don't think so. Just wondering what the the real number is when dealing with MY money. $7,000 now $9,900, Buying buildings before you have a contract, 5300 difference in enrollment at our new tech school, fall classes. $450,000 for a Art center thats open once a month, loans to another Art center that No one can tell me if they have been paid back. A Council that without a doubt is quite divided and if asked several would agree that we have a terrible morale issue at the City building. Someone who says between $3000-$9000 for OUR part of these lights. I would say many on this site along with thousands of others in this town have become" Numb" to the actions of this Admin. What does excite me is when I'm treated like a two year old and not given all the info, it's insulting. I know a few of these folks on this site and do not mean to speak for them, the ones I know LOVE this town and have given many hours of volunteer time along with investing their futures in businesses in this town as they watch OUR money being given away in the most hap-hazard of ways. I don't need a lecture on how to be a "Cheerleader", thats all the time I have since I better shutup and go to work so we can buy more buildings and HOPE they will come. |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 08 2011 at 7:59am
|
Vet |
Posted By: Voice of Reason
Date Posted: Jul 08 2011 at 11:36pm
|
Mike,
Let me pose this question to you--if the petition covered the city's portion (so that the amount assessed to the homeowners increased to cover the city's share, which is somewhere between $3K-$9K), would you then withdraw your objections to their proposal?
You seem to want the city to allocate a portion of its budget for street repairs--fine, so do I. Suppose they need about $2M to keep up the city streets in an acceptable condition. Tell me, how much are you willing to cut from the police and fire budgets to free up that $2M?
You have a gripe about the fact that S. Main will be re-paved, apparently because it's their turn based on the condition of the road and traffic on the road. I'm fine with that. Some people complain that they must be jumping ahead because Mulligan and Kohler live there--ok, then show me the criteria of how the streets are to be repaved and how S. Main should be behind some other street. My street will (eventually) come up in that queue as well, I hope. My point was that if I wanted to get my street re-paved and jump up in line, I'd be all for an extra assessment to get that done sooner.
All of your discussion that quibbles with the nature of the street lighting or road repairs is moot--if the residents of a particular part of town vote with a strong majority and pay for it themselves, then so be it. If a cobblestone street is what they want then why, exactly, can't they do it? Because you don't like cobblestone streets? You don't have a pony in this race (except for, perhaps, the $9K the city might spend). Why do you oppose improvements of other areas of town even as the residents of that are paying for it themselves? Is the $9K really a material difference? And to the point about the city having to maintain the lights--they city has to maintain the lights that are there, presently. And given that there are new lights (potentially) being installed on S. Main, it is plausible that the maintenance costs will be reduced in the near term. So it seems to me that there is no incremental cost to the taxpayers of Middletown other than the $9K for Old South Park.
Consider this--we already have a senior center that provides services to the elderly but they need more money to keep operating and improve the services that they do offer--based on your logic that S. Main already has lights, then should the senior center even be able to augment its services? Well if you're being consistent, then no, they shouldn't, because they already offer certain services, just as S. Main already has street lights. Furthermore, accoring to your logic, that particular levy is a travesty since it only directly benefits the elderly, which according to your principles makes it a total waste of taxpayer dollars, since many dollars will be spent for the benefit of a few.
I hear a lot of groaning and complaining about "special interests" and the friends of the city council members being taken care of with Pendleton, downtown, etc. Maybe those connected to the Mayor or council get some preferential treatment--I'm not sure. Cincy State seems to be geting preferential treatment (as best as council can give it) and that seems like something that would greatly benefit all of Middletown. But I'd like to make the point that having some art, education, and nicer amenities in town doesn't hurt the city--it might actually help the city and change the perception that Middletown is a dump.
Here's a thought--I am in principle very opposed to high taxes and I think we could do without a lot of what we get taxed for, but how about we try to raise the standards for people around town? How about we make it expensive to own property in Middletown, through strict zoning requirements and street paving assessments? So many people seem to bitch and moan about how council members are only in it for themselves--but again, having some arts and "upper class" diversions is actually a very good idea.
Anyone drive through Mason or Montgomery lately? Ever notice how they have clean streets, mowed grass and flowers in the medians along Tylersville in Mason? Do you suppose that they have pretty strict zoning and they spend a fair amount of money to upkeep those amenities? It's pretty clear that those sorts of things don't come cheap, but frankly I would be thrilled if Middletown were to pursue some projects like that. I can hear the chorus now from the old people on fixed incomes and the poor people opposing such measures (and I'm far from rich, believe me), but wouldn't it be neat if Middltown at least tried to be a nice town again, perhaps as in the 50's-60's?
Here's another general observation: A number of people seem to want less government and lower taxes, but in the next breath look to government to solve the problem and "bring jobs" to town. This is what people clamor for when they don't have marketable skills and aren't willing to invest in themselves. Blaming city leaders for not bringing jobs to town makes you smell like a rotten socialist, and from what I've gathered there are few, if any, of those on this forum.
Given the lack of educational attainment, on average, in Middletown, there won't be any high-tech, high-paying jobs that arrive here anytime soon. About the only thing a lot of people in Middletown are qualified to do is work jobs that barely rise above minimum wage, and there's no amount of cajoling with outside business interests that any city leader can do to change that. Instead of trying to get the city leaders to bring low-wage jobs (as these are the only ones for which many Middletonians could ever qualfy), how about we simply raise the bar for acceptable housing and road conditions? As I've said above, if this makes it too expensive for some to live in Middletown then I'm fine with that. We've got more than our fair share of poor people; maybe we'd get some peole with money and means to move to here if we had nice streets and strict zoning requirements. ------------- "Ask not what your country can do for you..." JFK |
Posted By: viper771
Date Posted: Jul 09 2011 at 2:50am
|
|
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 09 2011 at 5:10am
|
They needed a way to keep the money flowing into City Hall so they could all keep their jobs (with steady, hefty raises disguised as promotions so they could say that “no one’s had a raise in years”). Enter, Section 8 and all of the federal “alphabet” programs. In the meantime, the city’s middle class was being driven away, and the properties being bought up cheap by shell groups and turned into Section 8 rentals. “Neighborhood beautification” grants and the like paid for a lot of the work and made a whole lot of bank accounts “beautiful”. Unfortunately, the economy got TOO bad, and when AK’s excecs pulled out, their plan went south. They also ticked off enough people that Middletown may never turn around. Now the only ones left that are still being fooled are some of the stooges that they are using, but they have to keep riding the same horses. They wanted a “quaint, sleepy village” and that’s what they’ll probably end up with if we don’t seat new council people this election. They just didn’t count on it being a broke, quaint, sleepy, lawless slum-dog village. ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jul 09 2011 at 7:07am
|
been driving all around this city latelt, trying to get an honest grip on what is happening, should happen and happen fairly.
Don't see why the new streetlight concept stops at 9th ave. Seems 2 me that it should go all the way to 14th. Would then include the rest of the street up to Barnitz stadium. Plenty of nice homes though mixed with not as nice. Possibly wouldn't have recieved voter approval since income seems sparse aas we move south on Main. Still would make a nice path to the stadium and under-used park(had a nice picnic evening at Gladdell park last night with wife and grandchildren--my visiting grandchildren love that park). Cobblestone streets don't seem appropriate for a main traffic venue.
Residents had better hope that the city doesn't run out of $$, and create another mess like the botched Supthin project. Residents of S Main will probably get a much higher priority and attention.
Hey--crime is out of control---not being publicized for "image" reasons. Highest activity in the areas with the greatest section 8 concentration. So--we raise vouchers by 200, and plan to cut public safety? Anyone really see any logic behind this, or honestly expect it to improve our community? Section 8 concentration(no spending $$) is a strong reason why local businesses have gone dry within the city core areas.
had to get a backflow inspection for my sprinkler system(inherited the system when I purchased my home). Now I have to pay a $25 "application fee" which started this year. Another tax that went by without much notice or approval. What "fund" recieves this $$?
nice posts by voice, swat, vivian and others.
thanx 4 the effort Mr.P
we have to bond together to make this work.
so--who is delinquent on city loans?
can't fault section 8 residents for taking advantage of the opprtunity made available by city council and admin.
can blame the slumlord landlords for refusing to keep their properties maintained. same for the slumlords in the former downtown area, where nothing seems to survive. These slumlords are hardly cash-poor, and many are high profile people.
front of PAC seems out of compliance to the signage ordinance with the wraparound banner on the front pole and the awning situation. hmmmm
|
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jul 09 2011 at 10:18am
|
Voice- "But I'd like to make the point that having some art, education, and nicer amenities in town doesn't hurt the city--it might actually help the city and change the perception that Middletown is a dump".
AGREE VOICE, BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME IRONY HERE DOESN'T THERE? ON ONE HAND, THE CITY LEADERS ARE TRYING THEIR BEST TO BRING IN SOME CULTURE WITH THE PAC AND THE ARTZY CROWD DOWNTOWN. THEY SEEM TO BE MORE THAN CONTENT TO APPEASE THE S. MAIN ST. CROWD WITH THEIR STREET LIGHTS. THEN, WITH THE OTHER HAND, THEY APPLY FOR EVERY FRIKKIN' HUD PROGRAM AVAILABLE, LURING TO TOWN EVERY LOW INCOME, GOVERNMENT ASSISTED, HAND-OUT PERSON WHO HEARS ABOUT IT, BRINGING THE TOWN TO IT'S KNEES WITH POVERTY. HOW CAN THE CITY LEADERS AND COUNCIL THINK ON SUCH RADICAL TERMS? THEY PURSUE CULTURE AT THE SAME TIME THEY ARE PURSUING POVERTY. 
Voice- "Here's another general observation: A number of people seem to want less government and lower taxes, but in the next breath look to government to solve the problem and "bring jobs" to town. This is what people clamor for when they don't have marketable skills and aren't willing to invest in themselves. Blaming city leaders for not bringing jobs to town makes you smell like a rotten socialist, and from what I've gathered there are few, if any, of those on this forum" AND EXACTLY WHY WOULDN'T WE EXPECT THE CITY LEADERS TO BRING JOBS (DECENT-NOT LOW WAGE) JOBS TO TOWN? ISN'T THAT THE FUNCTION OF THE ECON. DEV. DEPARTMENT, VOICE? IF NOT, WHY DOES THE CITY NEED THIS DEPARTMENT? WHO ELSE WOULD BE WORKING ON BRINGING JOBS TO TOWN, THE CITIZENS? I'M NOT A SOCIALIST, BUT I DO EXPECT MY CITY LEADERS TO DO THEIR DAM JOBS, ESPECIALLY THE ECON. DEV. DEPT. Voice- "Given the lack of educational attainment, on average, in Middletown, there won't be any high-tech, high-paying jobs that arrive here anytime soon. About the only thing a lot of people in Middletown are qualified to do is work jobs that barely rise above minimum wage, and there's no amount of cajoling with outside business interests that any city leader can do to change that". YEAH BUT WE CAN BLAME THE 70's, 80's, AND 90's CITY LEADERS FROM THE PAST, WHEN THE PAPER MILLS WERE FOLDING AND AK WAS GOING DOWN THE TOILET AND DOWNSIZING. ALL OF THEM SHOULD HAVE SEEN THE CHANGE IN THE TOWN EMPLOYMENT CLIMATE AND STARTED PREPARING TO DIVERT THE JOB SCENE TO EMPLOYABLE VENUES OTHER THAN PAPER AND STEEL. THE PEOPLE IN MIDDLETOWN BEING QUALIFIED TO DO MINIMUM WAGE JOBS IS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE SCHOOL SYSTEM GOING DOWN THE TOILET SINCE THE 60's WHEN IT WAS RESPECTABLE IN PERFORMANCE. TO BE FAIR TO THE CURRENT SCHOOL PERFORMANCE, THE CITY HASN'T HELPED DUMPING ALL THEIR SECTION 8 CRAP AND ALL THAT GOES WITH IT IN THEIR LAP. THE CITY'S NEED FOR REVENUE THROUGH HUD MONEY HANDOUTS HASN'T DONE THE SCHOOLS ANY FAVORS. INCREDIBLY, THE CITY LEADERS DON'T APPEAR TO CARE WHAT DAMAGE THEY HAVE CAUSED TO THE SCHOOLS. SELFISH AGENDA. IF THE CITY LEADERS WOULD PLACE AS MUCH IMPORTANCE ON JOB CREATION AS THEY DO ON FAKE GAS LIGHTS, CHIPPED PAINT ON HOUSES, RUSTY GUTTERS, THE ARTZY CROWD DESIRES AND KISSING THE A-- OF THE MMF PEOPLE, WE MAY HAVE BEEN UP THE ROAD FURTHER IN THE IMPROVEMENT OF THIS TOWN. THEIR PRIORITIES ARE ALL SCREWED UP AS TO WHAT THIS TOWN REALLY NEEDS. Voice- "how about we simply raise the bar for acceptable housing and road conditions"? HOW ARE WE GONNA DO THAT IF THE CITY KEEPS INVITING SLUMLORDS AND ACCEPTING THE DUMPS THEY OWN? HOW ARE WE GONNA RAISE THE BAR ON ROAD CONDITIONS IF THE CITY WON'T RETURN THE MONEY THEY "BORROWED" FROM THE ROAD FUND AND PLACED IN THE GENERAL FUND WAY BACK IN THE 80's? THEY NEVER RETURNED THE MONEY TO THE STREET FUND SINCE THEN. THEY HAVEN'T HAD A COMPREHENSIVE STREET PREV. MAINT. PLAN IN OVER THREE DECADES. IMO, VOICE, IT WOULD BE WRONG TO NOT BLAME THEM NOR HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE SCREWUPS SINCE THE 70's. THERE IS NO DEFENSE FOR THEIR INCOMPETENT ACTIONS AND LACK OF VISION FOR THE CITY. Voice- "We've got more than our fair share of poor people; maybe we'd get some peole with money and means to move to here if we had nice streets and strict zoning requirements". WHEN YOU FIGURE OUT HOW TO ATTRACT SOME CLASSY PEOPLE WITH MONEY TO TOWN, PLEASE LET US KNOW. I WOULD IMAGINE PEOPLE WITH MONEY AND CLASS WOULD RATHER LIVE IN A COMMUNITY THAT OFFERS A LIFESTYLE RELATED TO MONEY AND CLASS RATHER THAN MIDDLETOWN, A TOWN WITH LITTLE CLASS NOR PEOPLE WITH MONEY. NICER STREETS AND STRICTER ZONING JUST AIN'T ENOUGH. GOT TO PURGE THE OVER ABUNDANCE OF LOWER INCOME AND GET RID OF THE "GHETTO LOOK" INHERENT IN THIS TOWN NOW. TOO MANY AREAS THAT LOOK LIKE THE INNER WEST SIDE OF DAYTON AROUND THIRD ST. |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 09 2011 at 8:07pm
|
Voice: After further reflection, I feel behooved to expand slightly on my comments of early this morning. You must bear in mind that our system of local government is not a pure democracy, but more of a democratic republic. That is, we all vote for elected officials who then represent us with their votes on issues that affect us all. Even still, the entire electorate of our city is entitled to vote on specific items of taxation, for example: the Senior Citizens’ levy that you mention, or the Public Health levy. Hence, if such a levy passes we must all live with the consequences, even if not everyone benefits equally, as the majority has ruled. However, when a small group of residents petitions our city government to expend municipal funds on a project that benefits only that small group, for example the decoration of a few blocks of a single street without a vote of the entire city, it is incumbent upon our elected officials to scrutinize such an expenditure in order to decide upon its logic, fairness and wisdom before either approving or denying it. This duty is especially important when a municipality’s finances are facing a crisis point, as is the case with Middletown. Also, you seem to think that it is worth spending $9,000 of public funds to slightly enhance the appearance, to a very small degree, of these nine blocks of Main Street. 63% of the property owners, by front footage, agree with you. I might even agree with you, if our city had a surplus of a Billion dollars or so. But let me ask you, and the members of City Council, this: “Would you be willing to spend $9,000 from the budget of the City on each and every eight block stretch of each and every street in the city of Middletown to enhance the appearance of the area to the same small degree?” If you would not, then you cannot be in favor of this. If you would, I have two additional questions:
------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: ground swat
Date Posted: Jul 09 2011 at 11:04pm
| Wouldn't it be "Neat" if the same people who scream about why we have so much section 8 and can't understand why more citizens don't confront the Admin. about it could apply that same logic to why it's important to question the same folks on how they spend our money. It always amazes me when people who play golf bitch about why their course can't look and play like the ones on the PGA, all it takes is money and a vision with leadership. By the way does anyone know were that line starts for "Handouts" of all that money we seem to have. Thats Ok not one business owner I know wants a damn thing given to them other than fair and balanced application of our laws, which I won't bring up. Getting the feeling I'm coming off as a anti-I should belief and trust everything I'm told taxpayer. |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 10 2011 at 10:51am
|
Ground Swat If you own a home in a historic district I believe you get special tax deduction. What is actual cost of a single light fixture plus 150’ of wire. |
Posted By: Voice of Reason
Date Posted: Jul 10 2011 at 10:45pm
|
Ground Swat--you've missed my point. Spending money your money on things such as nice light fixtures and re-paving the roads enhances the town, as would implementing strict zoning requirements that would make it unattractive for Section 8 slumlords to operate in MIddletown (because of the increased cost of owning real estate.
My point was that the city administration ought to spend more of our money on such enhancements with the hope that it will help build a more attractive town; I was making the opposite point that you are. I don't think it's important to worry about every single penny--it's far more important to worry about keeping happy the people who do actually keep up their homes and are active in the community than to sweat $9K out of a $28M budget. It's far more important that the city leaders make tough decisions regarding the police and fire (and administrative) budgets, which are the vast majority of what the city spends its money on than to deal with a neighborhood enhancement project. And by the way, we'd get far more bang for our buck, in my opinion if we spent $1M re-paving some roads and tearing down empty, dilapated housing units than we would spending it on, say, fire department staffing (many of whom don't live in Middletown, but that's another discussion).
That brings me to a question posed to me by Mike Presta. Mike, I'll grant that you have a point in that spending $9K for every 8-block stretch of the city would get very expensive, and so perhaps this petition is somewhat untenable as is. As I had said above, perhaps it would be "perfect" if it required the citizens to cover the city's portion, therefore making it a $198K for the people of S. Main rather than a $189K assessment. Such a change likely wouldn't alter the signature count of the petition.
But, I think you'd also have to concede this point--just how many neighborhoods in MIddletown could get 60%+ of their residents to vote for such a petition? I bet it would be an exceedingly low number. So in effect what we would do as a city is deny people who care about their neighborhood the opportunity to enhance it, 95%+ paid for by themselves, because in principle this petition is too expensive to implement everywhere else, where it would be opposed by the poor people and Section 8 slumlords (I say that because that seemed to be the primary opposition to this petition based on who was reported to sign it and the reasons given for opposing it). Again, this line of reasoning helps guarantee that Middletown will continue to be populated by the poor and slumlord lobby, as they are the ones who are most likely to oppose such petitions.
But I will try to answer the questions you posed to me--where would I find the money (say it would cost about $1M per year)? I would drastically change the nature of the fire department operations, moving to12-hour shift schedules and require the firefighters to work 3 or 4 shifts every other week to ensure 24/7 coverage. I would actually even explore privatizing the fire department, but that would be very tough to get done (for now). Saving $1M/ year would require cutting about 10-12 fire positions, which I bet could be done with a change in operational procedures as I have suggested without sacrificing effectiveness of the department.
Whose tastes get to determine the enhancements being voted upon? Well, that would fall the originators of the petitioners and those who are asked to sign the petition, of course. If, for example, a group came to me wanting to replace the sidewalks in my neighborhood with junked car hoods, I would vote no (as would a majority of my neighborhood, I reckon). If a group came to me asking if I wanted to put in decorative lights or potted flowers and a sprinkler system in the median, I would vote yes. Thus, the taste is determined by the signatories of the petition.
So now that I've answered your questions, perhaps you'll address one of mine that you overlooked--how much of the police and fire budgets would you cut to free up, say, $2M worth of funds to add to what the city is already spending on roads? You've made your point about how valuable it is to be at the head of the list for the street repairs--ok, I do grant your point, but I still don't see how S. Main has benefitted "unfairly". I have noticed that nearby Yankee Rd. has been re-paved recently, and that seems to be a much less traveled street, though perhaps it was in worse condition. But my point is that if Yankee Rd., which is near S. Main, is much less traveled, and hardly has many residents that seem well-connected to city hall, can get re-paved early in this process, then I don't see any obvious inequity or gross errors in the street re-paving program.
But back to my point about the police and fire budget cuts. You say it takes $120M to get everything repaired and ship-shape; ok, I'll take that as a given. You also say we spend less than $2M re-paving our streets currently; ok, granted. So if I were to propose that we cut $2M from somewhere else in the budget (and I'm asking you from where this money will come), that would mean we, as a city, are currently spending $3M-$4M on street repaving. If I also take it as given that the average life of a city street is 20-25 years, we are actually not that far from achieving the goal of good streets, if we can get the spending up to about $4M per year. I say we are not that far from achieving the goal of good streets because your $120M figure, broken up into $4M annual expenditures puts us at about 30 years per street. Not too bad, probably.
Thus, finding an extra few milliion bucks over what we spend now would solve our street problems, would you agree? So I'll ask it again--how much of the police and fire budgets would you be willing to cut to get us up to the point of a sustainable street re-paving program? Perhaps you think I'm picking on the police and fire departments, but truly I'm only suggesting them because, as Willie Sutton observed (in a different context, of course), "that's where the money is." If you want re-paved streets you've got to cut where the money is, and in our case it's in the police and fire budgets. ------------- "Ask not what your country can do for you..." JFK |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 11 2011 at 5:37am
|
Voice: I believe we are beginning to reach some common ground. Whether or not we ever agree completely, I think this has been a worthwhile discussion.
I would be, and have been in favor of finding funds in other areas. Street repairs and re-paving are legitimate uses for CBDG funds, yet City Hall refuses to even consider the notion, choosing instead to fritter such funds away every year and even TURN the funds BACK TO THE FEDS, unused rather that use it for our streets!! I find this unconscionable. Oh, and YES, I would rather see this $9,900 be applied to another street project than to tearing out perfectly good street lights and installing decorative lampposts!
But the point is, if the city is willing to do it for one eight block section, they should be willing to do it for EVERY eight block section. I doubt that they are willing. I doubt that they would even entertain a petition in MOST areas of town to tear out perfectly good street lights and install decorative lamppost with a $9,900 cost to the city.
On the other hand, How can we tell our Public Safety workers we are going broke, then turn around and spend $9,900 to tear out perfectly good street lights and put up DECORATIVE lampposts??? As for the road queue criteria, I’ve already admitted I don’t know how they choose, I’ve simply made observations. I had occasion last night (Saturday) to drive on the section of Main in question, and a little later northbound on South Breiel (between Oxford State Road and Lefferson). Breiel is in worse shape, and I’d be amazed if it didn’t carry more traffic than South Main near Kohler’s and the Mayor’s houses. Now, I don’t drive all that many roads in Middletown (or anywhere else, for that matter), and I usually drive the same routes (as I generally go to the same places--I live a dull life) so I can’t speak of every road in town. But when I drive on S. Main, it just doesn’t seem to be in as rough of shape as many of the other roads that I’ve mentioned that are as heavily (or more heavily) traveled. I could be wrong.
Just remember, whenever the “right” people want money for something, they NEVER seem to have any trouble at all finding a half million, or so, dollars “tucked away in one of our other funds” that they forgot they had that is available for them!!! ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jul 11 2011 at 8:34am
|
the streetlight situation just gets more interesting.
no doubt the resolution will be dramatic, while the long-range precendent and consequences are most important. The far from equal treatment among certain areas and entities plays an always huge role.
so--vor and mr.p---where do you go past the discussion stage here?
how are you communicating with local influences to change things?
I have strayed from dealinmg with Council and admin.
I have pretty much burned all bridges in that direction, while they view me as a nuisance/joke any more(and vice versa!)
adding more section 8 to the same over-stressed areas and cutting public safety and raising taxes simply won't take us anywhere towards improvement imo..
the natives are restless and growing more dis-satisfied every day(and I am talking high-end citizens).
everyone has pretty much seen enough of the the non-productive(even destructive) side show.
some interesting and alternative discussion groups are out there now--hopefully for the best.
I am trying to work with others outside the system to bring legitimate constructive and serious change, starting with the lead-up to the next election process. I surely can't accomplish much, so I simply hope to plant a seed in the minds of a few who have a much stronger voice.
A new, younger bureacracy must be established, anchored by the few younger family groups and residents who want to make this area their home, with quality of life amenities/options and a friendlier place to live.
Let's see what happens...........
|
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 11 2011 at 9:41am
|
Spiderjohn I see no change in sight for the next 5 years other than a downward spiral with an every increasing debt load for the taxpayers. Didn’t Gary Barge and his neighborhood sign a petition about the condition of the canal property only for the City to tell him that they didn’t have $200,000 to even start the repairs? Don’t you think this is a more serious problem that should have priority in the budget? |
Posted By: LMAO
Date Posted: Jul 11 2011 at 10:08am
We all should know by now that are spineless ones are going to do as they please.Main Street will get there fancy ass lights and dont care what we think.I pray every night that they (the spineless ones) will get kicked out of office for the nonsense thy have put this city through. They are nothing but theifs.I still like to know why Mullethead and Kohler are so special that we the taxpayers have to pay for their fancy ass lights.
|
Posted By: ground swat
Date Posted: Jul 11 2011 at 12:12pm
| Spend money to make money, do it every day. We all know, at least this is what has been allowed to happen, that government is not run like a private company. Pretty obvious since known of us could operate with a debt hitting 15 trillion or be allowed a 8 billion dollar debt like our state has. Trust me this worries me way more than south Main getting lamp post. Curb appeal to lessen section 8? Wasn't Adkins going up against the state to lay the law down and rid us of some of this problem? Zoning requirements are a part of life, whats great about them is keeping up with them and being able to afford them in the long run, seen the new schools lately, great crop of weeds. We all agree that the focus should be on revenues and not from more levies but new business. An attractive town with quality infrastructure certainly is needed but who's our salesman? Who's working with the unions and getting them sold on our "Vision" so they will help in shouldering some of the load on this loss of revenue. I'm not "sweating" the little things, just the folks we have put in charge of my childerns future local, state and Fed don't really impress me. Put up or shutup is what it's coming down to, got a couple of weeks before the paper work is due SJ we could go in and rattle the cage! |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 11 2011 at 2:45pm
|
Ground Swat
I'm sooo old I can remember when the only debt of a family was on their home. That's when cash was king.
Yep we have come a long way baby...however I believe it was in the wrong direction. |
Posted By: ground swat
Date Posted: Jul 11 2011 at 5:55pm
| I'm afraid it's going to have to get worse before it gets better Ms. Moon. Didn't mean to jump into a conversation that was really intended for Mr. P. Very passionate about the future of this town. Again I have NO problems with residents dropping their on money on improvements that increase the value of the neighborhood but what about the management of our tax dollars to fix the streets that we have payed into? And talking about improving the look of the town, how about starting out at the highway. Had a great person to help there and I'm sure his heart is still with Middletown but the way Mr. Robinson was treated I wouldn't blame him if he never said a kind word about this town again. The actions of the citizens in this town are and always have been to improve the quality of life. Certainly those who devote their time and sanity on council deserve our respect and should be able to take a chance at drawing in new business, but what about the businesses that have sunk tens of millions of dollars to keep up with todays market, does the city ever reach out to help them? How bout that steering commitee or a Admin. that can't make a decision or trust it's on employees to take care of our cities cemetery. It's not about the lamps for me it's about the track record of this leadership on the second floor! |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jul 11 2011 at 8:15pm
|
Ground Swat
Looking to bring new business to town is great...however...several years ago the the City stated they were concerned about the current business community here and were going to visit each one to see if they could help them in any way so they wouldn't go out of business during these trying times....Well I have talked with numerous business owers and the City has never contacted them.
It seems the only time they visit a local business is to nail them for a violation...that sure ain't business friendly to me. Now we have additional fines and more paperwork for a new business to deal with..mercy. The Lenny Robinson saga was simply unbelieveable in every way. |
Posted By: Richard Saunders
Date Posted: Jul 12 2011 at 4:07am
|
For the love of all things holy, let us be perfectly honest. Is there anyone left over the age of sixteen, other than those who feed at the public teat, who can possibly still believe that the City of Middletown’s government is “business friendly?” |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jul 12 2011 at 9:01pm
|
VOR - I am not sure I understand your reasoning behind two 12 hour shifts vs 1 24 hour shift for Middletown Firefighters. What exactly would the 12 hour night shift during down time?? sleeping, watching TV? If the night shift is from 8pm - 8am I could see them doing some work from 8pm - midnight but after that, what else would there be to do, sleep or watch tv?
Of course the MFD could take a lesson form Kettering Fire Dept. Which operates a paid/volunteer fire dept in a city larger that Middletown Population wise. They have 52 paid fire fire fighters and 102 voluteers. You can read more about it at http://www.ketteringoh.org/newweb/departments/fire/fire_main.php Concerning the $2M for road repair I am not quite sure how much is budgeted each yr right now, but if it is approx $1.2M the simplest way to get to $2M is to take the $3.50-$3.75 (not sure about this amount) that is being talked about being added to our water bills for street lights and add this approx $750,000.00 to the annual budgeted amount for road repair. this would give you $2M without having to layoff firefighters or police officers. It has been mentioned in several city council meetings by the city manager that these funds for street lights could be designated on road repairs. The only thing you need to watch out for is that the city manager/city council doesn't take the street light money in the front door and then take a like amount from the current road budget and move it somewhere else through the back door. This has been done by many states with their lottery proceeds and education funds. All of these funds should be designated soley for road repairs and nothing else by resolution. |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 13 2011 at 3:04am
|
Voice: Earlier tonight, I was discussing the petition and assessment issues with a gentleman over a few beers. He pointed out that his street has NO street lights, and asked if my position would be the same if the residents of his street petitioned for street lighting with decorative lampposts and faux gaslight globes.
I told him it would be the same in principle. However, in that case, if the city owned property on his street, that the taxpayers should be willing to pay the cost of STANDARD street lighting for their percentage of frontage, but that the cost over and above the cost of the standard installation should be solely to the account of the other property owners. Perhaps this makes my stance on the South Main Street lights more clear. On South Main Street, there is no cost to install standard street lights, since they already exist. In fact, there is an EXTRA cost to demo functioning, existing street lights that are the standard for residential neighborhoods throughout the city. ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jul 13 2011 at 9:55am
|
Sounds like the gentleman with no lights on his street could use those "Mulliganlamps" to illuminate his neighborhood rather than pitch 'em in the dump. Would be kinda "prestigious" knowing your street lights came from the high-fallutin' area of town, wouldn't it? Give a man some braggin' rights. Could even salvage the light poles with a flatbed semi to load and transport them from S. Main to his neighborhood, some electric wires run and some holes dug and he's in business.
|
Posted By: Voice of Reason
Date Posted: Jul 14 2011 at 10:56pm
|
Pacman,
Perhaps there is no difference in 2 12's vs. 1 24; I suggest something along those lines because other continuously operating institutions like hospitals or manufacturers (like AK) schedule their employees for 12 or 8 hours per shift, never 24. I will readily admit that I'm not fully up to speed on this issue, just that it doesn't, at first glance, appear to be the most efficient way to schedule an operation. I am, however, open to be convinced that their current modus operandi is the best way. And the idea of having a smaller firefighter force that is augmented by volunteers, as Kettering, does, is something that certainly ought to be considered. If you say they have 52 paid firefighters vs. Middletown's (approximately) 75 then there is a potential for some signficant savings, and such an arrrangement ought to be further researched.
Also, I would be in favor of allocating several additional dollars of the water bill each month towards street repairs as you suggest, and I agree that it ought to be "earmarked" for only street repairs and not lost into the general fund somewhere.
Mike,
I agree with your principle that the city ought to either extend the same privileges to the rest of its citizens that are (potentially) being bestowed upon S. Main or it ought to withhold those extra privileges from the S. Main residents if it won't extend them to the rest of the city. And I have conceded that perhaps the petition needs to be modified so that the petitioners also cover the portion that of the street that is city owned. But one thing I'm not clear on--you say that there is an "extra" cost of demolishing the existing lights, and I would concur that this cost is separate from the installation of the new lights. Are you certain that this cost of demolition is not covered by the petition as it stands now? If so, what are your source documents? I don't know either way myself, but I would agree with you that this cost of demolition ought to be included in the assessment along with the cost of the installation. And I further agree that if your drinking partner wanted decorative lights on his street that the residents ought to pay for the incremental cost over and above the cost of the standard lights, as you suggest.
And VietVet, although S. Main has some impressive homes on it, I would hardly call it "high-fallutin'" given the hodge podge of historic homes/Section 8 homes, wealthy/poor, high income/low income, owner-occupied/rental units, and also its proximity to some of the drug-infested parts of town. I'm not suggesting you're guilty of this, necessarily, but there does seem to be a fair amount of class envy on this forum. And my concern is that Middletown is made worse off because many people would rather drag down the well-to-do of this city than fault the un-educated and multi-generational LBJ "Great Society" ne'erdowells for making this town a far worse place than it used to be. ------------- "Ask not what your country can do for you..." JFK |
Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Jul 15 2011 at 3:17am
|
Voice,
By Jove, I think you've got it!
On South Main Street, since there are already existing lights, the cost to the taxpayers should be ZERO!!!
Zero for demo; zero for trenching up and down each side of the street; zero for underground conduit; zero for the foundations; zero for the lamposts and globes!!! Zero for labor; zero for materials and supplies; zero for equipment usage; zero for overhead and profit. Zero for the whole darned job!!! ------------- “Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012 |
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jul 15 2011 at 2:34pm
|
Voice...
"And VietVet, although S. Main has some impressive homes on it, I would hardly call it "high-fallutin'" given the hodge podge of historic homes/Section 8 homes, wealthy/poor, high income/low income, owner-occupied/rental units, and also its proximity to some of the drug-infested parts of town. I'm not suggesting you're guilty of this, necessarily, but there does seem to be a fair amount of class envy on this forum. And my concern is that Middletown is made worse off because many people would rather drag down the well-to-do of this city than fault the un-educated and multi-generational LBJ "Great Society" ne'erdowells for making this town a far worse place than it used to be". The "high-fallutin" comment was with tongue in cheek and the use of sarcasm. It was not meant to be taken seriously. I am aware that as you travel toward Barnitz Stadium the neighborhood becomes increasingly more dicey with the nicer homes just outside the downtown area. Fair amount of class envy? Won't speak for the rest of the people here, but for me, I don't envy them. It is more like a dislike for the upper class/rich. IN GENERAL, they tend to be more pompous, more arrogant and more disgusting to be around than the middle and lower class folks. Yes, if guilt needs to be assigned, I am a guilty party to this thinking. True. "And my concern is that Middletown is made worse off because many people would rather drag down the well-to-do of this city than fault the un-educated and multi-generational LBJ "Great Society" ne'erdowells for making this town a far worse place than it used to be" Actually, again speaking for myself, I have made a habit of "sticking the old knife" in the well-to-do here in town in equal proportion to the jabs I have given to the Section 8/freeloading/government handout people. I am opposed to the overabundance of low income HUD crap in this town (and what it is doing to this town) as well as some of the pompous a--h---- that are the so-called powerbrokers calling the shots in this town. Both infuriate me in different ways. No, I am for the slowly dying middle class, the ones who are being fleeced from both groups mentioned. Both groups are making this town a far worse place. They are just doing it in different ways.....and the people stuck in the middle are paying the price. JMO |
Posted By: FmrMidE
Date Posted: Jul 15 2011 at 5:21pm
|
You can "earmark", "designate", "make a friggin constitutional amendment that funds be used for a certain thing-but Les the Lawless and Justice (for me) Judy will take them anyway-as they happily sing their new duet "What's Law Got To Do With It?" (with apologies to Tina Turner)...
|
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jul 22 2011 at 8:57am
|
good one middie!
my solution:
Assuming a "final" cost( or approx.) for lighting/installation has been agreed and properly pro-rated to the affected property owners:
The minor cost of the public sector could be picked up by the same neighborhood association that offered to pay 1/2 of that cost. Why 50% of such a small #? Why not simply cover it all since they recieve the benefit?
Create a pro-rated monthly assessment for the increased monthly cost(400%!!) of operating this lighting. Same could be done in the Highlands area, the former downtown area, and anywhere else where this expensive lighting has been installed. Since it has become so easy for the city to add new costs/fees to water/sewer/trash billing invoices(and city already plans to add a fee for streetlight maintenence/power), this monthly assessment could be added also.The areas featuring this more expensive lighting are areas of greater affluence than the areas without. There should be no increased financial hardship created for those with less income for services not fully recieved. It simply isn't fair. As utility costs increase, everyones' share increases,
Since this new lighting is so much safer and illuminating, it should be installed everywhere when road improvements are made"(especially since installation has become so affordable in this case!). I surely want it on my street, and in less safe areas of the community that have more walker traffic. Soon everyone will be sharing the cost equally, while recieving full benefit from the more efficient, effective and safe street lamping.
Opinions?
|
Posted By: ground swat
Date Posted: Jul 22 2011 at 2:41pm
| No thanks if we have to go thru this nightmare to get the "Facts" it's easier to buy a tiki lamp. Keep the city off of my street. In regards to your other topics SJ water/sewer/backflow costs all need to be investigated. |
Posted By: acclaro
Date Posted: Jul 22 2011 at 3:15pm
|
If I understand the flow of economic recalculation to be accurate, what was once estimated to be nearly $9,000 is now $2,000, and the residents in the historic area desiring the lamps are willing to pay .5%, leaving a balance of $1,000, in addition to almost a 4X monthly increase in operations. Do I have that right sj?
And if so, the difference of $1,000 is so nominal, then why can't the residents in that area benefitting simply pick up the minor balance right? If there are about 32 residents here, or perhaps that was the 60% required to pass it, its about $32.00 each, the cost of the monthy DSL bill. So, I agree...they should pay it, its negligible.
I would have great and keen interest to keep the topic and eye on any attempts the city had to raise $3.50 monthly, for any Duke maintenance fee on lighting in Middletown. On two occasions, I have callled Duke and they have come out and immediately changed the light bulb in the street light next to my driveway, with no city involvement. I also do not comprehend why that is a dublicate bill, as some aspect of any lighting would come out of the .25% increase in general public safety.
Any attempt to make a few $ a month times all the total street lamps, when it is also being gotten elsewhere, is absolutely wrong. This is one I'd like to ask others to keep their eyes on, as really get into the details, if indeed, the city passes on a $3.50 monthly maintenance for the Duke lighting.
Middletown, between the two tax levies including the nonsensical one especially for paying down Sr Citizen debt, is just driving more and more away from the city sinking in despair.
|
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jul 22 2011 at 4:01pm
| Actually you might be best to carry a flashlight or simply stay in after dark since it is not safe in this town regardless of where you reside. Conceal/carry is also an option. |