Print Page | Close Window

Fire/Police Levy

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=4371
Printed Date: Apr 28 2024 at 11:36am


Topic: Fire/Police Levy
Posted By: 409
Subject: Fire/Police Levy
Date Posted: Feb 13 2012 at 10:07am
From the MJ:

Should fire, police levy be ongoing?

City leaders to seek renewal of a 0.25% income tax in November.

By http://www.middletownjournal.com/services/staff/1317913.html - Michael D. Pitman , Staff Writer 9:39 AM Monday, February 13, 2012

MIDDLETOWN — The city is moving forward to place its Public Safety Levy for renewal on the November ballot, but this time leaders want to address whether to ask voters for permanent funds to maintain police and fire protection.

A committee will be formed to evaluate the 0.25 percent income tax that helps fund public safety in the city.

The committee — which will incorporate city staff from the police, fire, finance and legal departments, and the police and fire unions — will serve three functions: advise council on whether the levy should be permanent, gauge the community’s support and run the campaign.

Council will need to approve an ordinance to authorize city staff to work on the committee and campaign, but Councilwoman Anita Scott Jones said she wants to ensure the committee is not staff-heavy.

“We need the input and backing of the community no matter what we do,” she said.

The additional income tax was approved by voters in 2007.

Fire Chief Steve Botts said the message communicated during that campaign was it would maintain — not add — to the police and fire services.

The two departments have a collective 2012 budget of $21 million — $8.95 million for fire and $12.04 million for police. The fund collected $2.2 million in its first year of collection in 2008 and generated roughly $2.9 million last year. The fund expires at the year’s end, but if renewed in November, it’s projected to collect around $3 million for 2013.

Councilman Josh Laubach said he wants to make sure the committee and city develop a Plan B.

“What happens if it doesn’t pass? As a council we have to be prepared to deal with that,” he said.

Botts agreed.

“I think the public needs to know that,” Botts said. “This is what you intend to do, this is what you’re going to do and this is what will happen if it doesn’t happen.”

Council members decided during its Saturday retreat at the city building that it would move forward to place the public safety levy on the November ballot instead of during a special election in August. Councilman A.J. Smith said the city would have greater success in August, possibly because of voter fatigue with federal, state and local races in the upcoming general election. However, the price tag to place a levy on the ballot in August would be $79,000. In November it would not cost the city.

“I think it would be worth spending $79,000 to be by ourselves, or with only one other issue,” Smith said. “Everything is in line for us to win in a special election,” he said, citing the rejection of Issue 2 (Senate Bill 5) in November that would have reduced collective bargaining rights for public employees.

To put the item on the November ballot, Council will need to approve legislation by Aug. 8.

Some of council say economic factors may result in a close vote at the polls. However, Middletown firefighter Jon Harvey, president of Local 336 of the International Association of Fire Fighters, said he is optimistic. “If you give us two or three months to prepare ... it’s got a high chance of passing by a higher margin.”

Council will discuss the issue further at its Feb. 21 regularly scheduled meeting in Council Chambers at the city building, One Donham Plaza.

Contact this reporter at (513) 820-2175 or michael.pitman@coxinc.com. Follow at twitter.com/mdpitman.




Replies:
Posted By: acclaro
Date Posted: Feb 13 2012 at 10:29am
Every council member wants this passed. Smith going so far as to keep voter turnout low, put it on ballot in AUGUST. Harvey, the union leader, wants 2-3 months to get his union machine in full throttle to pass it.




Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Feb 13 2012 at 11:58am
"Fire Chief Steve Botts said the message communicated during that campaign was it would maintain — not add — to the police and fire services"

Right off the bat, Chief Botts admits that they didn't use the money as intended and they lied to the voters to pass it. They did downsize the fire/police dept, didn't they?......didn't add......didn't maintain the same level.....they cut.

I see no reason to believe anything these people say anymore. It doesn't matter what area of city government you mention, from the fire department management to the city manager to the city council members....they are all "fabricators of ca-ca"----IE they tend to lie to the voters.

C-mon folks, it's rather obvious they have no intention of doing what they say they are going to do with the safety levy money. They didn't the last time. Please join me in voting no. As in the past, they will miraculously find some money in a "hidden fund" that will bail them out on this after we vote no. Fool the voters once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us.

Unfortunately, it will take bringing this city to it's knees financially, for them to have a clue what we want out of them. If you keep giving them what they want, they will continue to lie to you and abuse the people. Remember the "starve the beast" theme mentioned months ago here? It is disappointing that Smith, Scott-Jones, and the rest of council have no clue what the people in this town can really afford. They just keep asking for more money and apparently are on task to bleed our wallets dry, clueless and totally out of touch with the people.


Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Feb 13 2012 at 1:28pm
We have seen what the City did with the last Safety Levy. We have watched as million of dollars of City Funds have been wasted on “Their Downtown Dream”. And now the Cincy State deal has become a bad joke and a total waste of more of our tax dollars.
I will NOT support any levy.



Posted By: acclaro
Date Posted: Feb 13 2012 at 2:08pm
Sigh.


Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Feb 13 2012 at 3:06pm
"A petition to remove AJ Smith for his constant pandering to the fire department as his only constituents is being developed and running today at change.org. If you are interested in signing this, details will be forthcoming regarding where to login and sign this, to remove him from council.

Also, an effort and funding is being initiated to defeat the levy in November. Details to come"

acclaro

Are we just concentrating on Smith for removal? Is it possible to include Picard, Mort, and Mulligan also? All are just as bad as Smith for different reasons. (occasionally Scott-Jones and, at times, Josh Laubach deserve the same fate based on their decisions-ie- going along with the crowd)

Hope there is alot of interest in this levy defeat. Here's hoping the people finally get out and stop the influential group that always seems to get their way.


Posted By: Jack Black
Date Posted: Feb 13 2012 at 6:15pm
What A.J. Smith, The "Reverend" Al Sharpton, "Attorney Calhoun" and comedian Slappy White have in common??  Clown


Posted By: AKBobby
Date Posted: Feb 13 2012 at 6:23pm
Can't say I disagree but do you think the police dept can afford any more cuts? Not being argumentative but am curious as to what everyone thinks. Crime is high, thefts in town are out of control and we have less police officers than we had 15 years ago.

Thoughts?

-------------
AK - What is going on with that?


Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Feb 17 2012 at 10:14pm
I am voting no on this Levy for the following reasons:

1. The committee will be stacked with an accessive number of city staff; police, fire, police and fire unions, finance and legal departments employees. Most of whom do not even live in the city.  If any citizens are allowed on the committee they will be a miniscual number.  Or the same old "Yes Sir/No Sir", "What do you want me to do Now Sir" crowd. 

2. I do not agree with Union tactics nor do I agree with Unions.  I personally feel Ohio will be much better off as a "Right to Work" State.  It would be much more appealing to companies moving to Ohio.

3. I do not see where the Unions have made any effort to help their on members by taking pay freezes or pay cuts.  If this has happened I have not heard of it.

4. There are other options available such as reserve Police officers, Volunteer Fire Fighters, etc, etc.

5. AJ Smith disgust me with his pandering to the Unions and lack of responsiblity to the citizens.

6. We will get the same old "The Sky Is Falling" treatment from the council and Unions if we do not pass this Levy.

7. They now want to move this to a permanent Levy.

8. Even though this Levy does not effect me any longer fianancially as I am now disabled and retired, It will still effect my wife.  

PacmanCool



Print Page | Close Window