Last night's council meeting

How many times have we heard City Manager Gilleland preach about “community image”??? Didn’t we just hear her tonight moan about the need for “Improving community image” regarding the need for demolishing perfectly good sign structures simply because no business was currently occupying the building for which the sign structure is intended???

Yet Gilleland seems to be indifferent about our crumbling streets and the poor “community image” that that portrays. She let 2010 CBDG street paving funds go unspent, to carry over into this year.  I guess she just couldn't find any streets in Middletown that needed repaving last year

Oh well…we saw the groundwork being laid for those funds to be spent this year for the more expensive “OLDE TYME” street lights in Director Kohler’s favorite disadvantaged neighborhood: the S. Main Street HISTORIC District!!!

(You also could have read about the scheming by Director Kohler and his pals in the minutes of one of the Historic Commission meetings included in the workbook for last night’s meeting. Here‘s the link: http://www.cityofmiddletown.org/docs/council/01182011_w.pdf Look on page 45 of 124, under “Old Business“ in the 3^rd paragraph.)

I saw that I couple of more people were appointed to the Cemetery Board last night.

I find it odd that for a citizen to make a comment at a City Council meeting, he or she must give his or her full name and address (and sometimes their horsepower, credit card number and secret sign, if Mayor Mulligan perceives them as hostile to any of his causes   ).

However, when Council appoints people to the various boards, commissions, and committees--some of which have czar-like powers over private property rights, as well as the powers to fine and imprison--a simple name will do.

This is obviously and simply WRONG. We have a right to know EXACTLY who it is that is being appointed to these boards and commissions, AND where they are from!!! They should be identified AT LEAST to the extent as required of a citizen wishing to comment at a council meeting--at a bare minimum!!!

Speaking of Cemetery Boards:

Please recall the entire brouhaha last fall over whether or not non-residents should be permitted to serve on city boards and commissions. As I recall, the most strident pro-non-resident council members based their argument on the fact that NO city resident had experience in actually operating a cemetery, therefore it was absolutely essential that Fred Wehr (a non-resident, but operator of Woodside Cemetery) be allowed to be appointed to the soon-to-be-established Cemetery Board.

Well, here it is--after the second meeting of January--and all five members of the Cemetery Board have been named.

Did I miss something??? Mr. Wehr’s name was nowhere to be found among the appointees!!!!

So, can you pro-non-resident council members run that argument by me again, please???