Middletown Ohio


Find us on
 Google+ and Facebook


 

Home | Yearly News Archive | Advertisers | Blog | Contact Us
Saturday, May 11, 2024
FORUM CITY SCHOOLS COMMUNITY
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - What is Missing from this Report?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

What is Missing from this Report?

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Pacman View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jun 02 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2612
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pacman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: What is Missing from this Report?
    Posted: Jun 28 2010 at 9:40pm

Not having access to the actual report but what is only printed below, can anyone tell us what is missing from this report?  Let me give you a hint.....the cost to the city of Middletown and it's residents for having a Section 8 program with an excessive number of vouchers far exceeds the $1.6 million that is mentioned in the report.

A few other points:

Cutting 445 vouchers in a city with a declining population, declining tax revenues, no jobs, etc. is not enough.
 
Being worried about other communities showing "Resistance" to our cutting voucher.  I have to say, so what.
 
"The hope is the suggested changes will help the city find out how to get its Section 8 program “to a sustainable level,” Adkins said."  The question should be Is Middletown sustainable into the future in its current condition and with its current leadership, with a Section 8 program that is still excessive?
 
 
Council to review Section 8 report

By Jessica Heffner, Staff Writer
8:46 PM Monday, June 28, 2010

MIDDLETOWN — Three months of research and 100 work hours later, Middletown City Council will review a new report outlining policy changes that may help the city better control its Section 8 voucher program.

City Council will hold a special meeting beginning at 6:30 p.m. Tuesday night, June 29, in council chambers, One Donham Plaza. The focus of the meeting will be the new City of Middletown Section 8 Analysis completed by Doug Adkins, community revitalization director.

Several recommendations are being made to council, including reducing the Section 8 program by up to 445 vouchers, create a points system to favor working families in the program, and focus efforts on problem properties and their landlords.

“I am trying to give them everything they need to make an intelligent decision on the fate of the program,” he said. “Now it is their decision as to what policies they want to enact.”

How the city came to accrue 1,662 Section 8 vouchers — or 56 percent of Butler County’s voucher holders — was because it was trying to decrease vacancy rates in older homes, according to the report. But a decade after increasing vouchers, Middletown has 2,000 vacant properties and more than 68 percent of the city’s housing stock is older than 40 years.

It’s also a costly program for the city. As one of only two cities in Ohio that administers its own housing program, the report indicates the city is actually losing more than $1.6 million annually through taxes, and increased police, fire and other service costs as a result of Section 8. Meanwhile, Adkins said the almost 600 landlords in the program “are making millions.”

Implementing new policies will not be a problem-free endeavor. Cutting vouchers will force residents to other areas of the county, which may cause resistance from other communities. It will also add to the amount of vacant properties burdening the city as landlords leave, according to the report.

The hope is the suggested changes will help the city find out how to get its Section 8 program “to a sustainable level,” Adkins said.

“We are losing a lot through conditional costs,” he said.

Contact this reporter at (513) 705-2843 or jheffner@coxohio.com.

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 28 2010 at 10:12pm
What got me was the reason they give for the increase,to fill vacant houses. That to me is very laughable. While at the same time they made some very happy landlords out of the fiasco.
 
To cut only 445 is still laughable out of 1662 we'll still have over 1200 section 8's. Thats still far to many. Maybe they don't want to tick off to many millionaire landlords.
 
This report looks like maybe they are just playing with it,no real intentions of doing anything. I'll believe it when it happens.
No more democrats no more republicans,vote Constitution Party !!
Back to Top
VietVet View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: May 15 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 7008
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VietVet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 29 2010 at 7:22am
Increased vouchers to fill the vacant houses? That's a new one isn't it? Don't remember hearing that before. I agree, let's get this thing down to 700 or so as Pac has been professing for a long time now. 445 still won't bring us close to what we should have. Wonder how the folks in the city building will react to the talk of reduction when they know their landlord buddies might take a hit if this happens? Surely promises have been made by some of the friends of the landlords in the city leader arena to keep that Section 8 program money coming their way, right? Perhaps some "kickback" money for supplying them with the renters? Think Mr. Adkins will "take a hit" from Gilleland's crew when he brings this reduction thing up and "puts them on the spot"? Not to worry. They will table the meeting with a "no decision" tonight and it will all fade away over time, never to be discussed again.
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 29 2010 at 8:40am
I get the feeling the section 8 talk will take place in "executive session" aka behind closed doors. And without a doubt this will be a very long drawn out ordeal,After the submission of Mr Adkins report you just know they will want a second and third opinion before any decision can be made.
 
How will the reduction of >1200 vouchers affect federal money the city has been getting ? Does population play a roll in these federal dollars ? I think we are going to see a lot of double talk on this issue.
No more democrats no more republicans,vote Constitution Party !!
Back to Top
Doug Adkins View Drop Down
MUSA Immigrant
MUSA Immigrant


Joined: Jul 25 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 17
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Doug Adkins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 29 2010 at 8:59am

http://www.cityofmiddletown.org/community/news.aspx     -  See Housing Reports for the full report.

Hermes - Yes it does.  Look at page 96 of the report.

Doug Adkins
Community Revitalization Director
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 29 2010 at 9:04am

Can't thank you enough for the time,effort, and primarily the content/conclusions of your report, Mr.Adkins.

Took gonads to publish your findings.
 
Pretty much backs up the consensus of most everyone in the community with the exception of the participating landlords and tenants. Can't fault any of them for using the opportunity. Now it is time to close that window of opportunity. We would be better off if the properties became vacant, shifting the responsibility back to the property owners to find suitable tenants who could care for the properties properly. Also shifting the costs back to where they belong and away from the taxpayer.
 
This community has stressed long enough and spent far too much time/$$ on this program.
 
The key element now missing is immediate Council/Admin approval and proper action.
 
jmo
Back to Top
lrisner View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 330
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lrisner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 29 2010 at 9:44am
I believe the number of vacant Houses is going to be higher in the future and that is the Root Issue for me.

How do we deal with them? In my view they have to go. They will never be repaired or filled with Tenants. Just look at Rent Levels in Middletown. We are bargain, as far as Rent goes, yet still have many empty houses in almost every Neighborhood.

What would it cost to vacate a whole Neighborhood of the most degraded Homes? I think we have to bite the Bullet and make the investment to clear out a large number of these Houses or we continue as we have.

It is tough call. I'd bet it would cost $50mil to solve the Issue with one bold move. What Levy Millage would it take to pay for a 20 year Bond to do it? Would it ever have a chance to pass?

This is a very emotional Issue because there are no easy answers.




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 29 2010 at 10:22am
lrisner--as I mentioned, time to shift that responsibility(aka "the cost") back to these property owners who have used the Section 8 situation to their advantage. Granted--this is less than 50% of the target properties. If they go into foreclosure--so be it. Let the affected banks/lenders deal with their end. If the properties revert back to the city, then use the current grants to demo them instead of frill projects.
Tough love may be the only solution at this time.
 
No levy--no more taxpayer weight(yeah--right).
 
jmo
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 29 2010 at 11:05am
Originally posted by Doug Adkins Doug Adkins wrote:

http://www.cityofmiddletown.org/community/news.aspx     -  See Housing Reports for the full report.

Hermes - Yes it does.  Look at page 96 of the report.

 
Thanks Doug for that link & info. Being the pessimist that I am when it comes to politics I can't see the city giving up control to the state for allocations of fed dollars. At the same time I can see the 2010 census dipping below the 50,000 mark for the city,there is just nothing in the city for retaining citizens. As I stated prior,this will be a long hard battle IF council even gives it a real consideration. As for Middeltown being an active player in the metro area I don't see that at all. Yes we are developing the east side but that development so far hasn't produced enough results (still being new) to invite further residents & retain what we have left.
 
As for demolition of former section 8 houses I am mixed on that idea. If present landlords will retain the homes after the relocation of section 8 recipients then maybe a new program should be started to recruit new residents looking to rent. But thats a problem too with no jobs in the area. Good paying jobs,if available,are located in Dayton,Cincinnati,Sharonville,West Chester areas. So once again Middletown really has nothing to offer unless of course we can recruit industry back into the area. But that too would be a hard sell.
No more democrats no more republicans,vote Constitution Party !!
Back to Top
lrisner View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: May 26 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 330
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lrisner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 29 2010 at 2:41pm
Originally posted by spiderjohn spiderjohn wrote:

lrisner--as I mentioned, time to shift that responsibility(aka "the cost") back to these property owners who have used the Section 8 situation to their advantage. Granted--this is less than 50% of the target properties. If they go into foreclosure--so be it. Let the affected banks/lenders deal with their end. If the properties revert back to the city, then use the current grants to demo them instead of frill projects.
Tough love may be the only solution at this time.
 
No levy--no more taxpayer weight(yeah--right).
 
jmo



I think you missed my point. It is not about the condition of the houses, it is about the number of Houses. We simply have more Houses in Middletown than we have People who want to live here. We have to rid ourselves of some the Housing Stock. Rents are going down and that just puts more pressure on Landlords not to maintain them. We will never be able to Legislate nice Neighborhoods.

When the 2010 Census Data comes out you will see what I mean. I expect Middletown's Population to be at least 10% less than the 2000 Census.  The average House hold Income will take a huge nosedive.

I only brought up the Neighborhood Demo Levy idea as a counter to all the Section 8 Griping going on here. We are going to have a bad situation regardless of what we do. There is no Magic that will save us. We either have 2000 vacant Houses with 1600 Sec 8 or we have 3600 vacant Houses with no Sec 8. Either one is going to be bad. We go with the 3600 vacant Houses and make Paccy happy but then someone will be screaming that the City needs to deal with all vacant houses.

btw, the Banks/Lenders don't deal with the responsibility either. They let the Properties sit in Foreclosure Limbo so as NOT to have be Liable for maintenance or other things, i.e. Mowing. The Council just approved 75k just for that purpose.
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 29 2010 at 3:55pm
no--I see your point--I just want to pick a direction and go with it. Sometime you have to force the issue.
Abundant empty housing will take care of itself one way or another if you shift the expense back to the owners. They either rent them, sell them or walk away if the bank holds the majority of the value.
 
We are going to have cheap housing stock and depressed real estate values in the older core areas of the city--no way around it(actually we have been there for a long while).
 
Once again--I would like to see the overall expense shifted away from the un-involved taxpayer as much as possible for as long as possible. Empty houses cause less burden to social services, the schools and the police/fire dept. It probably wouldn't be worse than the mess we have currently.
 
Eventual demolition opens the door for newer improved business or residential opportunity.
If the town eventually comes back, these locations then have value.
If we continue to languish--it really won't matter either way.
 
I really like Mr.Adkins' conclusions and recommended direction.
I hope Council/Admin buys into this immediately and enthusiastically.
Doubtful--it might mean progress.
Back to Top
Richard Saunders View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident


Joined: Jun 30 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 232
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Richard Saunders Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 30 2010 at 4:41pm

"What is Missing from this Report?"

Most glaringly, the "why" and the "how" of the getting to the dire straits in which we find ourselves!

I believe that Mr. Joseph was going to tell us that during the pre-contract award purported "interview," just prior to his being "hushed up" by the city administration.  Perchance this would also explain CONSOC being awarded the contract despite being embarrassingly higher in price than two other very competent and able bidders. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.
Copyright ©2024 MiddletownUSA.com    Privacy Statement  |   Terms of Use  |   Site by Xponex Media  |   Advertising Information