Middletown Ohio


Find us on
 Google+ and Facebook


 

Home | Yearly News Archive | Advertisers | Blog | Contact Us
Saturday, May 4, 2024
FORUM CITY SCHOOLS COMMUNITY
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Main Street Lights
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Main Street Lights

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
FmrMidE View Drop Down
MUSA Immigrant
MUSA Immigrant


Joined: Oct 08 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 15
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FmrMidE Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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)...
Back to Top
spiderjohn View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2749
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote spiderjohn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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?
Back to Top
ground swat View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Mar 31 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 367
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ground swat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.
Back to Top
acclaro View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1878
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote acclaro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.  
       
Back to Top
spiderjohn View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2749
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote spiderjohn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.113 seconds.
Copyright ©2024 MiddletownUSA.com    Privacy Statement  |   Terms of Use  |   Site by Xponex Media  |   Advertising Information