People posting like middiemom are probably the last type of supporters that he is seeking. A winey insulting person on the attack is seldom helpful.

Thanx for the inclusion, what a city, however my song has been sung many many times over the last few decades. "They" know how I think--I know how "they" think:

The lifer locals have difficulty separating the current "5 year plan" from the other plans and studies that have been shoved on us for 20+ years. We don't distinguish between when Mr.A took the job from the decades prior, especially recent since he has long been a part of the inner workings before his current position. We have heard it all many times--often the sos, only coming from a different new voice with no connection to past efforts.

I am done with local community "meetings" about issues, whether it be city, schools, crime, business--whatever.

Once you get past the egos, chest thumping, attacks and defenses, little seems to come from honestly well-meant sessions.

Just get it done Mr.A--as fairly and efficiently as possible with the least expense. Instead of looking for ways to take income from working citizens, find ways to let them keep more of their $$. Let private enterprise run it's course. Only that can grow a business economy. Local govts are to crony-favoring, cost too much and take too long.

1. What is up with the streets? A lot of re-digging in areas that have been recently paved. Sewer issues? Poor work first time?

more later....

To What A City, Vivian Moon, VietVet, Acclaro, Nick Kidd, Paul Nagy, Mike Presta, etc., etc.,

What criteria were utilized by City Council in conducting Mr. Adkins recent impromptu performance evaluation?  How did they arrive at $25,000 as a justifiable one-time annual salary increase? Besides the AK Research Facility, I-75 apartment complex and the Power Generating Facility, were other significant projects involving Mr. Adkins and other key players fully scrutinized from a cost/benefit perspective?

It's good that Mr. Adkins has no problem with meeting(s) to foster improved lines of communication and trust.  That is a major responsibility of any successful city manager.  Of course, the meeting(s) location(s), citizenry attending and issue agenda(s) dictate the value of same.

Throughout this recent process, I am still concerned about the questionable impact of a number of other major city projects involving Mr. Adkins. First, there's the mostly unsuccessful former Thatcher properties deals.  Second is the projected 5,000 student Cincinnati State operation.  As Vivian Moon reports, only 700 students (online and on-site) attend C-State.  Third is the costly City/HUD confrontation over Section 8 that only led to other entities administrating the housing voucher endeavor with little to no reduction of subsidized units.  Fourth is the highly dubious 'vetting process' used by city staff in designating preferred developer status in the revitalization of other downtown projects.  Fifth is the wasteful use of federal funds in extravagantly expending multiple money-losing housing buy/rehab/sell projects of formerly foreclosed properties.  Sixth is the wrecking ball approach to dealing with Ward 2 problems.

Mr. Mulligan only presented a few select projects to help justify his role in the $25,000 deal.  The bottom line is that there is more than improved communication at stake here.  Millions in funds have been spent over the past 7.5 years on projects with less than stellar results. These projects are part of the legacy of Mr. Adkins and Ms. Gilleland jointly.

I can be available anyday, Mon-Fri from 5PM to 9PM. 

Uhh, middiemom, I believe if you re-read the dialogue between Mr. Adkins and myself, we started with the idea to have a community forum. He answered by suggesting we have a one on one in his office which would be residential suicide for me going it alone. For obvious reasons, and because of the history this city has for vindictiveness toward residents who don't necessarily buy into the city plans, i reneged on that idea proposing we invite as many as would attend and I suggested he bring his city council with him so that they could hear, first hand, the conversation and issues brought forth. I also suggested it would take several events to complete the discussion. I suggested it be an evening event to include as many residents as possible allowing those who work days and those who work midnights to be included. I suggested council chambers or a banquet room at the Seniors Center as the venue. He responded by suggesting it may be an ambush situation for him and the people would "gang up" on him with that scenario. I left it at that for now. It is not a dead issue for me and I would like him to place the event on his busy calendar at some point in time. He needs to find the time and, I'm sure, the community would accomodate his schedule. Not cricket "chirping". Not just blowing smoke here. Not a "blowhard".  I would like it to happen if it is set up correctly and not under the city's rules, his rules or the council's rules. Just civil dialogue that would be constructive so that he understands how people feel about their city OUTSIDE his comfort zone of his special friends in the city....... "outside the comfort zone" .......you know, the people the city deems as "non-essential" to their future plans and who are in the group labeled as "others" and are excluded from being listened to most of the time.