Middletown Ohio


Find us on
 Google+ and Facebook


 

Home | Yearly News Archive | Advertisers | Blog | Contact Us
Saturday, November 23, 2024
FORUM CITY SCHOOLS COMMUNITY
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Main Street Lights
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Main Street Lights

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
rngrmed View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: May 06 2009
Location: Middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 309
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rngrmed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Main Street Lights
    Posted: Jul 04 2011 at 1:26pm
I only caught a small portion of the council meeting.  From what I saw, the rest of the town is going to buy special light posts for the residents on Main street?  Is this correct?
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: Jul 05 2011 at 1:26am
Ranger,
Not exactly.
 
Ohio law allows the residents on a street to pettition a city to install "street lighting".  If 60% or more of the property owners, by frontage, have signed the petition, city council may decide to install steet lighting and assess the costs to ALL property owners (whether they signed the petition or not) according to the frontage they own.  (I believe that the City pays for the frontage-foot equivalant at street or alley intersections, but I am not 100% certain of this.) 
 
Now, there is already EXISTING street lighting on South Main Street, but the good residents (including Mr. Kohler and Mayor Lawrence P. Mulligan, Jr.) on that street feel that the same law that allows residents to petition for "street lighting" allows them to petition for demolition of existing lighting and replacement with decorative street lampposts and faux gas light globes.
 
Since the City of Middletown owns some property on South Main, we taxpayers will be on the hook for our "share" of these decorative items.
 
Three weeks ago at the last council meeting this amounted to "$7,000+".  This week it is already up to "$9,900"!!!   (Isn't it great how they used the old retailer's trick and kept it under $10K???  I'm surprised it wasn't $9,999.99.) 
 
Who knows how high the taxpayers' share will be before it's over???
 
I guess city council thinks that there is plenty of money to spare in the city budget!!!
“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
rngrmed View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: May 06 2009
Location: Middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 309
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rngrmed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 05 2011 at 8:05am

So the City can afford this and other nickel and dime (less the $10k) but we are going to lay off firefighters and police officers???  The City wants to impose new taxes to cover expenses, but we are buying decorative lamps?  Really?? 

Sure property owners are being assessed too, but this is just 1 project. How many other unneccessary projects are they pulling this scam on?
Back to Top
SupportMiddletown View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident


Joined: Nov 01 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 181
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SupportMiddletown Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 06 2011 at 11:21pm

$10,000 is a good deal for the city to get streetlights in the historic district. Go to Hamilton or Springfield; These cities have multiple historic districts that have had period streetlighting for years, installed and maintained by the city. If the residents are willing to carry the cost to get this public improvement completed, I think residents should be applauding, not complaining over the small public portion.

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: Jul 07 2011 at 4:02am

My Dear Supporter:

Of course you are correct. The ill-mannered detractors are thankless when these best of our city ask so little of them. The common-folk of the city should be willing to do so much more for these who lend so much grace and elegance to elevate the overall wretchedness of this otherwise miserable pisspot of a burg.

Why, even slashing more of the fire-watch and the constabulary would be reasonable, if it would fund a nice garden for the gentry to enjoy in their common areas. The street urchins don’t appreciate the parks any way. Tear out the play toys, I say, and provide a strolling area properly tended with guarded gates. More elaborate fountains where the noble few might share the evening breezes, safe from the churlish masses, would be a more proper use of the public treasure.

I say that you, SupportMiddletown, would be the proper person to oversee such an effort, with a handsome stipend from the City, of course.

Bring this matter before the Mayor and the proper authorities post haste, Sir! (But do it at one of the private meetings, please, lest the peasants revolt.)

I remain
Your servant
R. Saunders
 
P. S.: I am certain that a petition could be arranged, if absolutely necessary.  Walls and gates for each of the manors would be another splendid thought.  With conscripted labor, we shan't be forced to suspend the Widows' & Orphans' Fund for more than a few score years.
Back to Top
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 10:32am

Mike
You can go to the Google Map of Middletown, Ohio and count the number of homes effected by the new gas lights between 1st and 9th Avenues.

Back to Top
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 11:27am

Will those that have property facing another street but their side yards are on Main Street also have to pay for these lights?? Were they also included in this petition?
If you look at the google map you will notice that some of these properties have a huge amount of frontage and therefore many more gas lights would be required. The
Old South Park covers an entire block…how many lights would be required.

Back to Top
acclaro View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1878
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote acclaro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 12:04pm
Vivian, all of this a moot point. The lamps are Larry Mulligan's vision, the basis for his 2nd term. He's building the firewall around his historic area with Ms. G's and council's help. That's what his second term is all about. It could cost $100,000 and it would not matter. $10,000 is too much for anything else, but when it benefits those building the firewall. No more complicated than that. As it is, as it has been, as it will be in the fture, until 4th/ 5th generations of residents are gone, reliving the past, and the only spent is protectig 1) the Beast 2) the firewall around the historic area.  They'd spend $1,000,000 on this unchecked, but not a dime for a pool. Probably have Pratt negotiating ith AK and Wainscott to use the remaining $18,000 in pool fund $$$ to put in Victorian Gables and oak porches for everyone on Main.
Back to Top
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 12:41pm

I have often wondered why none of the houses that are located on Yankee Road where not included in this historic district since many are even older than those on Main Street?

Back to Top
acclaro View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1878
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote acclaro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 1:09pm
ANSWER to above:
 
1) net worth $$$
 
2) MD, phD, MBA next to name
 
3) Who Who in Middletown yearbook
 
4) School attended 
 
5) Closeness to library---who is running LM's re-election?
 
 
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: Jul 07 2011 at 4:07pm
Originally posted by SupportMiddletown SupportMiddletown wrote:

10,000 is a good deal for the city to get streetlights in the historic district. Go to Hamilton or Springfield; These cities have multiple historic districts that have had period streetlighting for years, installed and maintained by the city. If the residents are willing to carry the cost to get this public improvement completed, I think residents should be applauding, not complaining over the small public portion.
MiddletownSupporter:

First:

If some of the other cities put a roof over their downtowns, should we do likewise???

If some other cities try to make a lake out of their rivers without securing all necessary regulatory clearances, should we do likewise???

If all of the other kids jump off of a cliff…??? SHEESH!!!

Next, I’ve been to Hamilton and Springfield…have YOU??? And I’ve been to downtown Middletown, which also has olde tyme lighting. Exactly WHAT has “period lighting” gotten ANY of these places, EXACTLY???

Finally, I DO applaud these folks doing period lighting, or any other thing that THEY want to do that THEY think improves THEIR property!!! I just think that THEY should do it with THEIR money and not everyone ELSE’S.

Can’t you understand that the city is going broke?? OUR municipal debt is increasing every year!!! OUR children are already heavily in MUNICIPAL debt for DECADES. We are being FORCED to cut back on ESSENTIAL municipal services!!! And we will likely be FORCED to take on HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of more municipal debt (separating combined sewers and fixing our other crumbling infrastructure) in the very near future!!!

We have THOUSANDS of skilled and semi-skilled trades people, and thousands more unskilled workers in this town who will have very grim prospects for employment, and who will not be able to afford to move away. When these people have no way to feed their families, except to steal from YOU, and we have been forced to lay off the last of the police, do you plan to call a DECORATIVE lamppost for assistance???

So, fine…buy all of the decorative lampposts that YOU want, if you think that is the wise thing to do, but PLEASE…do so with YOUR own money!!! The city can NOT afford it!!! The rest of us can NOT afford to decorate YOUR home!!!

“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
nezitiC nwotelddiM View Drop Down
MUSA Immigrant
MUSA Immigrant
Avatar

Joined: Oct 02 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 13
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nezitiC nwotelddiM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 5:56pm
If I am not mistaken the petitioners are willing to pay for 100% of the costs.  
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: Jul 07 2011 at 6:31pm
Originally posted by nezitiC nwotelddiM nezitiC nwotelddiM wrote:

If I am not mistaken the petitioners are willing to pay for 100% of the costs.  
nezitiC nwotelddiM:
 No need for that.  SupportMiddletown is so convinced that this is such a "good deal" that I am certain he/she will be stepping forward with a personal check for the full public portion of the costs.
 
This is correct, isn't it, SupportMiddletown???  You will be putting your money where your mouth is, won't you???
“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
viper771 View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident


Joined: Mar 16 2009
Location: Middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 221
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote viper771 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 7:30pm
Originally posted by Vivian Moon Vivian Moon wrote:

I have often wondered why none of the houses that are located on Yankee Road where not included in this historic district since many are even older than those on Main Street?

 
Ms. Moon,
 
I asked that same question myself. I looked into it as well at the library. When the district was setup in the 1970s, it was going to include more houses on Yankee Road (I think there are only a couple) and also the nice houses on Vanderveer. But, I think the owners at the time opted out (I think some houses were rentals) or for whatever reason, none of the future parts of the historical district were never added on unfortunately. I wish some were put into the historic district, since a few have fallen into such decay :( There is a yellow book in the reference section in the library about the historic district which includes all the info. 
Back to Top
viper771 View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident


Joined: Mar 16 2009
Location: Middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 221
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote viper771 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 7:34pm
Originally posted by nezitiC nwotelddiM nezitiC nwotelddiM wrote:

If I am not mistaken the petitioners are willing to pay for 100% of the costs.  
 
Yeah, that is what I understood at well. If that is the case, I think it would make the area look better, while at the same time not costing anyone else money...But, IF the taxpayers do have to front the money, that is something that can wait until later.
Back to Top
ground swat View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Mar 31 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 367
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ground swat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 7:52pm
Mr. P- I did not see all of council and since we don't belief in less taxes in this town and I've been working did anyone say that this expense would be and will be on the parcel owners only?
Back to Top
TudorBrown View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Aug 24 2009
Location: Highlands D.
Status: Offline
Points: 265
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TudorBrown Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 8:14pm
Originally posted by Mike_Presta Mike_Presta wrote:

Originally posted by nezitiC nwotelddiM nezitiC nwotelddiM wrote:

If I am not mistaken the petitioners are willing to pay for 100% of the costs.  
nezitiC nwotelddiM:
 No need for that.  SupportMiddletown is so convinced that this is such a "good deal" that I am certain he/she will be stepping forward with a personal check for the full public portion of the costs.
 
This is correct, isn't it, SupportMiddletown???  You will be putting your money where your mouth is, won't you???


Yes!  LOL

SupportMiddletown, put your money where your mouth is!
Back to Top
Voice of Reason View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident
Avatar

Joined: Oct 13 2010
Location: Williams
Status: Offline
Points: 69
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Voice of Reason Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 8:32pm
I saw some of this discussion at the council meeting, and from what I've gathered it seems that the city will be on the hook for somewhere between $3K-$9K for the property it owns (I think Old South Park?) as part of this project.  Is this really worth getting so excited over the city spending 4 figures worth of taxpayer dollars? 
 
I guess I'm baffled as to the logic behind the opposition to this--if the property owners on S. Main want decorative lamps, or new sidewalks, or a re-paved street, or potted plants, or a trolley, or a bike path, or any other "improvement"  that they deem appropriate, and are willing to pay for it themselves, then what, exactly, is the big deal? 
 
I would be glad to chip in a little more in taxes to re-pave my street and get new sidewalks put in, but am I forbidden from doing so if the city owns property on my street?  By that logic, of course, the city can't spend any money that doesn't directly benefit ALL citizens of Middletown.  No money for Sunset, since that only benefits the swimmers; no money for the sidewalks, since that only benefits the walkers; no money for the seniors, since that only benefits the elderly.  Taken a bit further: no money for the police, since that only benefits those who want police protection (and there are certainly some ardent 2nd amendment supporters in this town who believe they could do without the police!); no money for the fire department, since that only benefits those whose houses burn down (an even smaller number than those who live on S. Main, I would reckon, even though we spend millions on fire protection). 
 
So there you have it--if we restrict city expenditures to only those services that benefit all Middletonians, can anyone tell me how, exactly, we would spend money on anything?  It seems that there are a number of people on this forum who oppose anything the Mayor does simply by virtue of his address--some of you are convinced that everything is a conspiracy to return Middletown to the 1800's.  I don't live on S. Main but I do freely admit that I admire their willingness and desire to improve their neighborhood, to make it more attractive to live there, to make it more unique and worth preserving, which is so unlike much of the cheap, disposable, cookie-cutter housing development that occurs today. 
 
So let me pose this question--would you pony up an extra $20 per month to get your street re-paved?  If you would (and I certainly would; I would help chip in to help pay for improvements to a number of streets that I don't live on just to help make Middletown more sightly), then you can't legitimately oppose this petition by the S. Main people.  Frankly, it's unbelievable to me that we would stand in the way of improvements--PAID FOR BY THE PEOPLE SIGNING THE PETITION-- because the city will spend mere pennies out of its budget to cover the portion that they're obligated for under the petition. 
 
If you ever wonder why Middletown has deteriorated so much in the past 30 years, here we have a prime example--the slum landlords and working poor didn't sign the petition (but there was still more than 60% who did) and people are wringing their hands over $9,000 the city might spend (over about a decade or two, I believe) to buy a couple of street lights as their share of the bill.  There isn't a person on this forum who hasn't railed against Section 8, and if this petition is one tool that makes it less attractive for Section 8 slumlords to operate in Middletown (because of the higher property taxes) then you should all be supporting it. 
 
I do try to support Middletown as best as I can, but it seems that all too often the lowest common denominator of people end up getting the support of people on council (Scott-Jones and Laubach in this particular debate), and as a result Middletown continues its downward spiral.  Maybe if council took up measures that raise the bar for people, maybe if they demanded that people keep up the appearance of their homes and businesses (like Mason, West Chester, Montgomery, etc. do), maybe if we didn't try to attract every derelict in Butler County through Section 8, perhaps Middletown would be a nicer town with better schools and stable home prices.  But instead we bicker over pennies and favor the slum landlords and lifelong welfare cases over people that seem to genuinely care about their neighborhoods, and we wonder why people think of Middletown as a ghetto/white trash city. 
"Ask not what your country can do for you..." JFK
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: Jul 07 2011 at 9:39pm
"maybe if we didn't try to attract every derelict in Butler County through Section 8, perhaps Middletown would be a nicer town with better schools and stable home prices. But instead we bicker over pennies and favor the slum landlords and lifelong welfare cases over people that seem to genuinely care about their neighborhoods, and we wonder why people think of Middletown as a ghetto/white trash city".

                                    Voice of Reason

I LIKE THIS OBSERVATION.

"Maybe if council took up measures that raise the bar for people, maybe if they demanded that people keep up the appearance of their homes and businesses (like Mason, West Chester, Montgomery, etc. do)",

ONE PROBLEM WITH THAT IMO......PEOPLE IN MASON, WEST CHESTER AND THE MORE AFFLUENT COMMUNITIES HAVE THE MONEY/PRIDE/CLASS TO MAINTAIN THEIR HOMES. YOU JUST MENTIONED MIDDLETOWN IS CONSIDERED A GHETTO/WHITE TRASH CITY AND, GIVEN THAT FACT, SOME ARE LOW INCOME WITH NO DISPOSABLE CASH TO MAINTAIN A PROPERTY. DON'T THINK YOU CAN RAISE THE BAR AND GET PEOPLE WITHOUT MONEY OR CLASS TO BE ABLE OR WANT TO PARTICIPATE. SOME LOWER INCOME PEOPLE HAVE PRIDE WHILE BEING POOR AND TAKE CARE OF WHAT LITTLE THEY HAVE. I WOULD IMAGINE THE MAJORITY THOUGH, HAVEN'T BEEN RAISED TO TAKE CARE OF THINGS OR UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE PRIDE. THEIR MOMMA AND DADDY DIDN'T GIVE THEM EXAMPLES OF PRIDE OR SHOWING A LITTLE CLASS TO LIVE BY GROWING UP.

VOICE, I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT THERE MAY BE A PERCEPTION THAT MULLIGAN, KOHLER AND THE REST OF THE S. MAIN ST. CROWD ARE RECEIVING PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT (AS HAS THE HIGHLANDS HISTORIC DISTRICT) AS TO THE ACTIVITIES DIRECTED TOWARD THEIR AREA OF THE CITY, WHILE THE REST OF US ARE A DISTANT TENTH ON THE LIST OF NINE ON IMPORTANCE. THERE MAY BE A PRIORITY/SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON PLEASING THESE PEOPLE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE REST OF THE CITY. IT APPEARS THAT WHATEVER THESE PEOPLE WANT THEY GET AND IN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME. WHATEVER THE REST OF US WANT, GETS NO ATTENTION NOR EFFORT THROWN AGAINST WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS. IT IS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF PLEASING THE SMALL LITTLE BAND OF INFLUENTIAL PEOPLE AND FRIENDS OF CITY HALL AND IGNORING THE REST, A PRACTICE THIS CITY EXCELS AT. IT IS A MATTER OF KEEPING IT "ALL IN THE FAMILY" WHEN MONEY IS SPENT IN THIS CITY.

AND YES, $20 BUCKS A MONTH TO HAVE MY STREET PAVED WOULD BE A GOOD DEAL DEPENDING ON HOW LONG I WOULD HAVE TO PAY. THERE MUST BE AN END TO THE PAY PERIOD WHICH YOU DIDN'T STIPULATE IN YOUR COMMENT.    NONE OF THIS SHOULD BE HAPPENING THOUGH. IF THE CITY HAD SET UP THE BUDGET BACK IN THE 80'S AND LEFT THE MONEY IN THE STREET REPAIR FUND INSTEAD OF STEALING IT TO PLACE IN THE BLACK HOLE CALLED THE GENERAL FUND, THE CITY WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE STREET REPAIR SCHEDULE AND BEEN WAY AHEAD OF THE GAME BY NOW. PAST AND CURRENT COUNCIL'S HAVE NEGLECTED TO RETURN TO A PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM FOR STREETS AND NOW WE ARE ALL PAYING THE PRICE FOR THEIR INEPTNESS. THEY ALWAYS FIND A WAY TO DIVERT ANY MONIES INTO FUNDS OTHER THAN THE STREETS.
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: Jul 07 2011 at 11:02pm
maybe if the city admin focused on bringing meaningful employment to the community, citizens could afford to improve their properties or at least hold on to them.
 
maybe if econ dev and comm revitalization were functional in actually revitalizing the community and developing a real local economy instead of blowing taxpayer funds on dead end losers and stipends for the historical districts.................
 
as Mike P mentioned, downtown Hamilton and Springfield might have decorative streetlights(like the former downtown area of Middietown), but that is about all that they have. Ever been to Lima?
Back to Top
LMAO View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Oct 28 2009
Location: Middletucky
Status: Offline
Points: 468
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LMAO Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 07 2011 at 11:19pm
Why should we taxpayers have to foot the bill for Mullethead and Kohlers lights?Anyone that says we wont have to foot the bill for them and maintance I have some swamp land for sale.What makes them so damn special? Maybe Mullethead Mulligan can ask his golfing buddy McCoy to donate them.LOL
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: Jul 07 2011 at 11:51pm

Originally posted by Voice of Reason Voice of Reason wrote:

I saw some of this discussion at the council meeting, and from what I've gathered it seems that the city will be on the hook for somewhere between $3K-$9K for the property it owns (I think Old South Park?) as part of this project. Is this really worth getting so excited over the city spending 4 figures worth of taxpayer dollars?

I guess I'm baffled as to the logic behind the opposition to this--

Voice:

Apparently you are baffled, so please allow me to try to explain it to you, point-by-point, as clearly as I can:

Originally posted by Voice of Reason Voice of Reason wrote:

if the property owners on S. Main want decorative lamps, or new sidewalks, or a re-paved street, or potted plants, or a trolley, or a bike path, or any other "improvement" that they deem appropriate, and are willing to pay for it themselves, then what, exactly, is the big deal?
As to this, we are in complete agreement!! If they “are willing to pay for it themselves”, there is no “big deal”, in fact, they are to be commended!!! I applaud them and I am glad to find that YOU agree with ME!!!

 

Originally posted by Voice of Reason Voice of Reason wrote:

I would be glad to chip in a little more in taxes to re-pave my street and get new sidewalks put in, but am I forbidden from doing so if the city owns property on my street?

And that is exactly what you will have to do in Middletown now. Even though the city is supposed to husband a portion of all of the other taxes it collects to provide for the maintenance of infrastructure, and even though the State provides a portion of certain taxes specifically for the maintenance and repair of roadways, and even though the State contributes the lion’s share of the maintenance and repair of state routes through municipalities, our city now has a policy that (except for a select few streets every year) any neighborhood desiring a street to be re-paved will have to follow the petition process, with the bulk of the expense to be borne by the property owners on that street. So, if you want your street to be re-paved, be prepared to pay. BUT, it will not be “a little more in taxes”, as you have already paid in taxes for this service. You will now be ASSESSED for the bulk of the cost of re-paving your street in ADDITION to the taxes you have already paid. The city (that is, the rest of the taxpayers) will only bear the cost equal to the percentage at any street or alley intersections, or the percentage for any city-owned property on that street. As with any other street repair project, any sidewalk or curb repairs in front of your property will be assessed to your property. NOTE: The re-paving of South Main Street is NOT part of this petition process!!! The ENTIRE expense of repaving South Main Street is being borne by the TAXPAYERS and will NOT be assessed to the property owners on South Main Street!!! Although some have questioned why South Main Street between 2nd and 9th was selected when many other streets in the city seem to be just as heavily traveled yet are in worse condition, no one has complained about the taxpayers paying for street repaving. This is a legitimate use of tax dollars, just as the repaving of YOUR street would be. Yet you will have to pay, over and above your taxes, to get your street paved. Further, in this part of your supposition, you mention only sidewalks (which will be assessed ONLY to you) and street re-pavement, the cost of which will be, at least partially, shared by the taxpayers (even if the City owns NO property on your street). Still, no one could have a legitimate complaint. Everyone has a right to use your street, and you have a duty to share in the costs of paving their street. But in this example you don’t mention painting your house, or adding a fountain in your front yard, or installing a lawn jockey to illuminate the house number on your curb--all of which would be considered DECORATIVE items that should be completely to YOUR account!!! Nor do you mention demolishing perfectly good sidewalk for replacement with Italian Glazed tile with the taxpayers sharing in the cost.

 

Originally posted by Voice of Reason Voice of Reason wrote:

By that logic, of course, the city can't spend any money that doesn't directly benefit ALL citizens of Middletown. No money for Sunset, since that only benefits the swimmers;
Your logic here is convoluted. Sunset Pool was a PUBLIC pool available to ALL. Anyone who wanted to use it, could use it. Decorative lampposts on South Main Street between 2nd and 9th decorate that area ONLY. They provide NO “decoration” nor ambiance to, say, the corner of Tytus and El Dorado.

 

Originally posted by Voice of Reason Voice of Reason wrote:

no money for the sidewalks, since that only benefits the walkers; no money for the seniors, since that only benefits the elderly. Taken a bit further: no money for the police, since that only benefits those who want police protection (and there are certainly some ardent 2nd amendment supporters in this town who believe they could do without the police!); no money for the fire department, since that only benefits those whose houses burn down (an even smaller number than those who live on S. Main, I would reckon, even though we spend millions on fire protection).
You remain baffled here. First, even though sidewalks are available to benefit everyone, whether they elect to use them or not, the costs of sidewalk repairs or replacement IS assessed to each individual property owner and is NOT borne by the taxpayers. All of the fortunate among us will one day become elderly, as we all grow older each day. Police and fire protection are available to everyone, and even if YOUR house is not burning, if the house next door is, the firefighters will attempt to PREVENT the fire from spreading to YOUR home. I further submit that you are in error concerning 2nd Amendment supporters. Most Second Amendment supporters are also strident supporters of law enforcement.

 

Originally posted by Voice of Reason Voice of Reason wrote:

So there you have it--if we restrict city expenditures to only those services that benefit all Middletonians, can anyone tell me how, exactly, we would spend money on anything? It seems that there are a number of people on this forum who oppose anything the Mayor does simply by virtue of his address--some of you are convinced that everything is a conspiracy to return Middletown to the 1800's.
No. But there is an ever growing number of people in town that is becoming more and more convinced that most things this administration does is to benefit a small group of influential people, and their friends, and other “special interest” groups as opposed to the best interests of Middletown as a whole.

 

Originally posted by Voice of Reason Voice of Reason wrote:

So let me pose this question--would you pony up an extra $20 per month to get your street re-paved? If you would (and I certainly would; I would help chip in to help pay for improvements to a number of streets that I don't live on just to help make Middletown more sightly), then you can't legitimately oppose this petition by the S. Main people.
I see that you remain baffled. We all “pony up” these amounts periodically as we pay our taxes, including our gasoline taxes and license plate fees. That is what such taxes and fees are for--not for giving buildings to developers who promise art centers, paying their in-laws to renovate the art centers into banquet halls, or decorating small groups of homes for influential homeowners.

I won’t comment on the remainder of your post, since I believe that you were just venting, and we all need to vent once in a while. Yet I must point out that I might look at this differently if this area of Main Street presently had no street lights!!! But that is NOT the case, and many people seem to be conveniently ignoring the fact that part of the cost to be borne by the taxpayers includes demolishing perfectly good existing street lights!!!

What would you say next year, if these same folks decide that their neighborhood would look nicer if the street had nice, olde tyme brick pavers???

What if they were petitioning to tear up brand new, smooth-as-a-baby’s-bottom asphaltic concrete pavement to be replaced with fancy olde tyme brick pavers, while YOU bounce your car up and down YOUR street back-and-forth to the alignment shop every week, and the taxpayers’ share was $500,000? Would your attitude be the same???

Ridiculous??? Of course!!! But the principles are the same.

“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
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: Jul 07 2011 at 11:58pm
Oh, Voice, one more thing:
Don't count on getting your street paved for $20/month.  You will be lucky if $20/month covers your curb and sidewalk repair assessment.  I doubt that you'll believe me, but why don't you talk to a contractor.  It'll be scary how much it'll cost you if you petition to have your street re-paved.
“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
viper771 View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident


Joined: Mar 16 2009
Location: Middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 221
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote viper771 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 08 2011 at 4:58am
Originally posted by spiderjohn spiderjohn wrote:

maybe if the city admin focused on bringing meaningful employment to the community, citizens could afford to improve their properties or at least hold on to them.
 
maybe if econ dev and comm revitalization were functional in actually revitalizing the community and developing a real local economy instead of blowing taxpayer funds on dead end losers and stipends for the historical districts.................
 
as Mike P mentioned, downtown Hamilton and Springfield might have decorative streetlights(like the former downtown area of Middietown), but that is about all that they have. Ever been to Lima?
 
I have been to Lima Spider..many times. There are bad parts of the city, but there are also good parts too. It happens to any city at that size, which is about the size of Middletown, if I am not mistaken. In any mid-large city, there will always be good and bad parts. There are parts of California that are that way too.. The good parts are usually so expensive to live in that it keeps the trashy people out..and by expensive, I mean REALLLY expensive.
Back to Top
ground swat View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Mar 31 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 367
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ground swat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jul 08 2011 at 7:50am
Getting excited over, don't think so. Just wondering what the the real number is when dealing with MY money. $7,000 now $9,900, Buying buildings before you have a contract, 5300 difference in enrollment at our new tech school, fall classes. $450,000 for a Art center thats open once a month, loans to another Art center that No one can tell me if they have been paid back. A Council that without a doubt is quite divided and if asked several would agree that we have a terrible morale issue at the City building. Someone who says between $3000-$9000 for OUR part of these lights. I would say many on this site along with thousands of others in this town have become" Numb" to the actions of this Admin. What does excite me is when I'm treated like a two year old and not given all the info, it's insulting.  I know a few of these folks on this site and do not mean to speak for them, the ones I know LOVE this town and have given many hours of volunteer time along with investing their futures in businesses in this town as they watch OUR money being given away in the most hap-hazard of ways. I don't need a lecture on how to be a "Cheerleader", thats all the time I have since I better shutup and go to work so we can buy more buildings and HOPE they will come.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.117 seconds.
Copyright ©2024 MiddletownUSA.com    Privacy Statement  |   Terms of Use  |   Site by Xponex Media  |   Advertising Information