Middletown Ohio


Find us on
 Google+ and Facebook


 

Home | Yearly News Archive | Advertisers | Blog | Contact Us
Monday, May 13, 2024
FORUM CITY SCHOOLS COMMUNITY
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - June 15 meeting
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

June 15 meeting

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Dead man walkin' View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident
Avatar

Joined: May 06 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 51
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dead man walkin' Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: June 15 meeting
    Posted: Jun 14 2010 at 1:40pm
Here is an item from the minutes of the Middletown Library Board's  from the city council workbook:

XI Other

Mr. Bean reported that a resident of Mount Pleasant Retirement Home met with him and asked that he present a request to the library board to consider paying the utilities for the Monroe Lending Library. Mr. Bean did not know if legally the library board could help them. Mrs. Preston said that more information regarding their corporation status would be needed to determine if it would be possible to assist them. Mr. VonderHaar said that after Election Day the board may want to revisit how to help Monroe with its request for help.

Mr. VonderHaar mentioned that he would also like to explore the possibility of changing the name of the library system to better reflect the broad service area the system encompasses."

You people have to start noticing stuff like this if you want to save your town.  Notice that he intentionally put off until after the election his goal to expand (not restore, but expand) both services and range until after you people voted to give him more money.  This is typical of today's alleged civil servants, especially here in Middletown.
 
The Silverhawke thing is OK on ots face.  The money shuffling behind it is nothing more than "hide the bugger".  This is how they do something that seems to be innocent and needs to be done, but after all is said and done, when the money is "reimbursed" it ends up somewhere that it shouldn't be.  Sometimes it magically reappears only to be wasted on a useless pet project.   Sometimes it disa[[ears forever into a nondescript numbered fund.
 
There is also a lot of power grabbing and other evil stuff going on in the crap that Kohler is trying to foist off as a mere revision of the zoning code.  Council should vote it down straight away.
 
Presta should've given us a heads up on this stuff.
 
"Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil" (Psalm 23)
Back to Top
wasteful View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 27 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 793
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wasteful Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 14 2010 at 2:25pm
Changing the name Sounds to me like another way of  moving away from Middletown, much the way Middletown Hospital did.   They don't want the stigma of being know as Middletown anything, yet they want our $$$$$$.   As far as paying bills for Monroe let them pay their own.
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: Jun 14 2010 at 4:12pm
This "yu people" thing really gets old
As with life in general--if you want something done(especially YOUR way) you had better do it yourself.
And you should never expect someone to do something for you that you won't do yourself.
 
No surprise--the library got the $$--now they will tell eferyone to f' off and spend it however they choose.
The suckers that voted this in deserve it.
 
Back to Top
Mike_Presta View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mike_Presta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 14 2010 at 7:34pm
Mr. Walkin,
With all due respect, I would like to reiterate one point and make a second point.
 
Point one:  I appreciate the confidence that you and the others may (or may not) have come to find in me to pour over the workbook twice a month, and I am glad to do it as circumstances permit.  However, let me repeat that it is NOT my actual JOB to do so.  We all have an equal responsibility as citizens to stay informed as to civic affairs. 
 
Since I usually have more time than most others, and since I have both the skill set and the experience necessary to: A) go through the gobble-de-gook often contained in the workbook and understand it;  B) read between the lines as to what it really means, what they are trying to do, and why; C) translate it into understandable terms and often even suggest the possible ramifications; I try will continue to try to do this for as long as, and on the occassionsthat, I am able to do so.
 
Point two:  After I skimmed this week's workbook (this is my usual first step) and found an item that I consider not only of exceptional importance but also that will take more time than usual, I started with that item first!  (That is also my habit.)  This week it was Kohler's attempt to grab the power to "shortstop" any development that does not meet his personal twisted vision for our fair city.
 
His proposed revisions to the zoning ordinances are convoluted, narrow-minded, complicated, contradictary, dangerous, business unfriendly, expensive, restrictive, illogical, arrogant, and fraught with opportunities to allow, and even encourage, graft and corruption.
 
For these reasons it is taking longer than I usually spend to review that part of the workbook, and I may want to hold the information until just before the meeting (which I may attend) in order not to forewarn the scoundrel.
 
While I understand your situation better than you might understand, and I offer my very sincere wishes and hope that things work out to your best possible advantage given your personal circumstances, I must ask that you bear in mind that any assistance that I provide here is provided on a voluntary basis and NOT part of any obligation, either expressed or implied.
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
Back to Top
Hermes View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: May 19 2009
Location: Middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 1637
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hermes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 14 2010 at 9:20pm

I for one voted for the library levy against better judgement,I should have known better.

I can also say to the library....this is the LAST time you ever get a yes vote from this house !!
No more democrats no more republicans,vote Constitution Party !!
Back to Top
wasteful View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 27 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 793
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wasteful Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 14 2010 at 9:28pm
Hey Mike I got a Kick out of reading about Kholer World.  Many businesses left off Kholers list of blessed businesses, but I did find it odd that you can have a Cemetery anywhere you want East of I-75, but you can have a McD's and many other restaurants in only a very small area, same for gas Stations and other businesses which may draw revenue to Middletown.  Seems Restaurants with Drive thrus are a no no.
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: Jun 15 2010 at 8:35pm
thanks, Mr.P
good job!
Back to Top
Mike_Presta View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mike_Presta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 16 2010 at 12:37am
Below is a copy of an email that I sent to some of the city council members regardin last night's Public Hearing just a few minutes ago.  Since it is part of the public domain, I thought that I would post it here:
 
********************************************************************************************
 

I have two items that I would like to discuss in this email to your city email addresses.

The first is that of email addresses. At times there may be items that I may wish to share, including some of a personal nature, that I feel are not the business of anyone else on council or city staff and are not appropriate to be part of the public domain. If any of you would favor me with a personal email address, I would greatly appreciate it, and assure you I would use it strictly for one-on-one emails, or only as a "blind carbon copy" (bcc) if I want to copy you on an email to others.  Also would not burden any of you with an multitude assault of useless, unwanted messages.


Second, regarding this evening’s Public Hearing:

In my earlier email, I wrote:

“First, the re-zoning amendment is not only unnecessary; both hostile to and unwanted by current property owners (and therefore likely to subject the City to likely lawsuits);…”

Please recall the sentiments of the gentleman from Waffle House. Other developers and business persons have expressed similar sentiments, usually in a much more hostile manner, in private conversations. They FEAR doing so openly lest they suffer damage from vindictive public officials wielding discretionary powers and the legal costs of fighting same.

@

In my email, I also wrote:

“… but also testifies as to why this most prime of all locations on the I-75 Cin-Day corridor has become the very last to (if ever to) be developed: Constant interference and obstruction by inept (or worse) local planning and zoning officials trying to dictate personal will and choices upon experienced, successful developers.”

The Waffle House gentleman’s testimony also confirms my thoughts on this! This successful developer, with the vision to see exactly what I described, invested in raw land, grew his investment into the most profitable location of his considerable number of similar holdings, dutifully paid his large tax bills (both property and income) to the city for decades, and now has been BULLIED into near ruin---left with a useless half acre!!! Why? Because a very few people in our city (and ONE city employee) think Waffle Houses are “tacky” and one city employee is obsessed with getting his expensive but beloved “water feature” foisted upon the people of Middletown’s children and grandchildren, and managed to convince ODOT to build a more expensive, less efficient interchange to accommodate the monster that will eat tax money for decades to come. If ANY of you believe that this energy-eating, maintenance-monster water fountain will really bring an actual, positive return on investment, PLEASE cruise the interstate highways of our once prosperous nation and provide me with the interchange locations where this has been the actual case!!!

The entrepreneurial Waffle House gentleman also questioned the “signs” portion of the Zoning Ordinance. Let me put the answers to his concerns into the most understandable, bottom line, terse terms: “You can have all of the signs that you want, as long as no one can see them!”


In my email I continued:
“Second, the so-called “text amendment to amend the Conditional Use Permit Application Process” is not only blatantly, intentionally and cleverly mis-labelled in an obvious attempt to disguise its true intent, but also is probably the most dangerous piece of legislation that I have seen cross council chambers in the eleven years that I have been closely observing these proceedings.”


“It is potentially more destructive to our City than the Crossroads 2000 sham that failed to produce any results and for which our children will be paying for years to come. Please recall that only a select few profited from the taxpayers money on that scam, and nothing close to the pie-in-the-sky pipe dreams ever came close to actuality.”

I noticed that no one tried to refute my comments about Crossroads 2000. Well, it’s tough to deny something that stares you in the face every day. Yet we are reminded constantly that our former downtown has a “bright future” and that things will be better “in a year or two”! (Didn’t we just hear that again tonight about our “new downtown” out at I-75? God forbid that we end up with the same results!)

We also heard comments from a city staffer and two business entities that clearly demonstrate my concerns are valid:

A city staffer stated that the new zoning will allow development of only “5 acre minimum lots.” Yet a consortium with deep pockets representing what might be considered the “right” kind of developers had a lawyer present praising this zoning change, confident that his clients will be able to develop their TOTAL of SEVEN acres on THREE different locations with no problems! Yet our entrepreneurial “wrong” kind of Waffle House developer had all sorts of concerns.

One must wonder whether if the Waffle House was a trendy wine bar, and the owner had thrown the “right” soirees for locals who perceive themselves as “power brokers,” then this gentleman would have exhibited the same confidence as the lawyer for the clients with three small lots.

I will not go on here about my memo, but in closing, let me just say this:

Be sure to consider Mr. Landen’s statement at the very end of the Public Hearing. I believe (although I cannot be sure) that he was responding my concerns that, under the new zoning ordinance, one person would have too much power and that developers would not be able to plead their case in public before council. Mr. Landen seemed delighted to point out that developers who might be disappointed in the zoning czar’s rulings would be free to pursue the matter in Common Pleas Court.

Please recall the very last lines of my memo:

“I realize that these are weighty charges. I only wish that there was a way … to be fairly heard, without going deep into debt with legal fees.”

Once again, so much for “business friendly” Middletown! If you don’t like it…SUE US!

And certainly don’t forget former City Manager and fellow council person Becker’s quizzical comment: “What are we doing here?”

Do any of you REALLY know the answer to that question???

@

PS: Since this message is being sent to your city email address, it is part of the public domain. That being the case, I am going to post it on Middletown USA. This would not be the case with any personal correspondence that we might have in the future using other email addresses.

“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.055 seconds.
Copyright ©2024 MiddletownUSA.com    Privacy Statement  |   Terms of Use  |   Site by Xponex Media  |   Advertising Information