Tonights City Council Meeting

Unfortunately I can not make tonights meeting, nor am I at a place I can watch it live tonight. So any updates that people can give tonight would be great.

The Law Director stated that “Marty” had “drafted” portions of the sign legislation to put in what “he wanted”!!! What the heck is “Marty” doing drafting legislation and what the heck does it matter what “Marty” wants???

The drafting of legislation is the Law Director’s job. If he can’t do it, fire him and hire someone who can do it.

All legislation should be drafting with the aim of being as fair and uniform as possible, and should NOT be slanted towards what “Marty” or any other special interest wants!!!

Nor should it be drafted to allow any individual to selectively enforce the legislation’s mandates according to whim or subjective opinions.

It is time for both Landen and “Marty” to be shown the door!!!

PattiGal wrote: Were you there, Mike?

PattiGal,

Mr. Robinson: Here's a suggestion:

From today's Journal:

As members debated the need for a change to sign ordinance language, Councilman A.J. Smith suggested the real issue was whether Middletown has adequate leadership from its administrators. He questioned the direction staff has taken regarding the Section 8 voucher program and branch campus plans with Cincinnati State Technical and Community College — and said it may be time for a staff change.

“If we are going to look at a change of direction and being fair ... maybe we should look at a reorganization of our leadership,” he said. I'll go one step further AJ.....not MAYBE.....the "reorganization" of city leadership should start with the city manager and proceed on down through the ranks at the city building. The "reorganization" should be renamed "downsizing and cleaning out the deadwood" with a total replacement of key city leaders who exhibit a new direction for the city. Council could/should make that happen if they cared for this city. The current crop is bad for the health of this town. We will never recover until we eliminate the people who put us in this situation.


Laubach said he felt staff was spending too much time trying to make things “nice and pretty” in Middletown instead of dealing with more important problems. BINGO MR. Laubach!!! Is the rest of council going to open their mouths to support this? What is the matter with you Picard, Mulligan, Becker and Allen? Say something- anything. Commit.

However, Economic Development Director Mike Robinette argued the sign ordinance and its enforcement is a necessary tool to improve the city’s appearance and draw businesses. Silly, non-important statement Mr. Robinette. No, the necessary tool to drawing business is to invite them in, ask what can we do for you/how can we help you get established, supply them with business location choices, lower the taxes for them to rock bottom until they establish themselves and are drawing a profit- then pro-rate the taxes based on business success so as not to put them out of business. Help them grow instead of crushing them before they build their business. All of this "sign talk" comes after the fact. Fill the stores and assure the businesses are on sound operational ground- then concentrate on the minor things like signage WITHOUT the Gestapo tactics currently being employed by Kohler and Landen. Knock it off boys. Too much time spent on sign talk and not enough time spent on occupancy of vacant stores in town. You have it backward.

She (Ms. Scott-Jones) also agreed with Laubach there were more pressing issues. Amen. Nice to see we have some people on council who show some logical thinking. What's wrong with the rest of you?

“I would be more concerned with filling the buildings and filling the spaces than removing signs at this point,” she said. A second BINGO for Ms. Scott- Jones!!!

I missed it !!!! :(

Landen got a "smackdown" from Picard very nicely played. Not rude, but the message was loud and clear. ASJ took notes about the $25,000. NOT spent on the building project to save the Thatcher estate and the 'boy toy" appeasement. take note where that $25,000. appears somewhere. Now that the Manchester has closed, how does Cincinnati State intend to operate a business that could not sustain itself?

Vivian, I believe it is also unconstitution to unequally apply law to selectively targeted individuals, groups, and races. The city ordinances are vague in many readings, including 2910 in particular. It includes the tax section which is also unconstitutional in many sections. Middletown cannot do what the state does not require nor federal government. Interesting Mr. Landen expressed "terrified" when discussing case law in other municipalities. Perhaps speaking about the horror associated with many aspects of the city ordinances filled with ambiguity and holes, rendering it unconstitutional.

I've missed the details of the city's beef with Lenny R.  I know there's the property vacating issue but which signage are we talking about?

Signs, schmeins, another odd looking thing are those brick model homes at the end of Commerce Dr.

If the "downtown" fund was authorized for the full amount, would not the $25,000. be returned to the General Fund/ If not, and it remains, why would council need to re-authorize its expenditure, as it was approved. Really don't know. Assumption was ASJ was keeping her eyes on where the $25,000 might end up, but probably will be carried over to the Manchester expenditure.