Merrell Wood's Letter About Council

Mr. Wood 's article in the Journal concerning the makeup of Council was an interesting read. In the article, Mr. Wood says that the "bad old days" of Council consisted of 5 members, all at-large and all living on the same street. He also noticed that the make-up of the charter committee appeared to be constructed so as not to represent the demographics of Middletown, mentioning that the mayor had appointed his brother, keeping it all in the family. The article goes on to point out that it may be time to go back to a 5 man council rather than the current 7. Mr. Wood, nothing has changed over these many years. Since the 50's, when I was old enough to realize there was a council, my grandpa told me, (I found out later he told the truth), that this town was run then, and has been run since, by a small group of people who look out for each other and are generally from the influential group of controllers that are citizen exclusionaries. Armco called the shots in the 50's, 60's and 70's as to who would be in key positions in this city. Now, with AK's influence on the decline, a group of private, secretive, self-important people are running the show. They are not about to relinquish control so they choose their buddies to man the numerous committees.The few "outsiders" on this charter committee will quickly find out that their best attempts to amend the charter will be silenced/ignored by the power broker's reps. The agenda on this committee will follow the same route as all other committees- that is- the decisions have already been made before the game has started. They will silence dissenting voices of change with their sheer numbers on the city charter committee. Same with the Street Repair, same with the Finance Committee- same with all committees. If you wish to participate on a committee in Middletown, make it easy on yourself-just agree with what they want- but then again, if your going to do that, why volunteer? Why waste your time?

The article that you posted says that the money "can also be used for demolition" which is the option that sold the Council on approving the authorization for Ginger Smith's department to go out and pur.homes that meet the criteria of - able to be rehabbed and salvageable to fix up and sell.Apparently the city only has a short time to act on this authorization or they lose the opportunity. Schiavone, Becker and Marconi all said in that meeting that it is not a good idea for the city to get into the real estate business of buying, rehabbing and trying to compete with the homeowners in selling these rehabbed properties.The city still has 7 of the 10 properties they bought years ago on the market. Becker said the city tried it once and "wasn't very good at it". I believe, when the city actually sees the 2.1 mil,(Voinivich is checking to see where the check to the city is), that we will see demolition of vacated,foreclosed properties rather that rehabs. Gilleland said in the meeting that we were only talking about 54 properties out of 20,000 homes in Midd.As for the city doing the work on demolition- I'm not sure that the city has the proper equipment, the manpower nor the expertise as to safety and pollution- what if there is asbestos insulation in these homes. How about lead water pipes. Some of these homes are from that era, aren't they? Wouldn't there be EPA issues in the demolition?

Vivian- yes that is an option, BUT-- reread your earlier post that says "the money MAY ALSO be used for demolition" That reads (to me) that the city has an option to use ALL the money for demolition. The rules for the use of the money gives the city the option to use ALL the money for demo OR all the money for rehab or in any combination. This topic is what Marconi was going on and on about before he and the rest of Council voted yes on giving Smith the authorization to use the money(when it is received by the city) to purchase the houses TO BE DEMOLISHED OR TO BE REHABBED AND RESOLD.

Nature of the program
The municipalities that receive this money will develop their own programs and funding priorities. It is required that they use at least 25 percent of the funds for the purchase and redevelopment of abandoned or foreclosed homes or residential properties that house those whose incomes do not exceed 50 percent of the area median income. All activities funded by the Neighborhood Stabilization Program must benefit low- and moderate-income people whose income does not exceed 120 percent of area median income.

Eligible uses
Money from the Neighborhood Stabilization Program may be used for activities that include, but are not limited to:

Establishing financing mechanisms for purchase and redevelopment of foreclosed homes and residential properties

Purchasing and rehabilitating homes and residential properties abandoned or foreclosed

Establishing land banks for foreclosed homes

Demolishing blighted structures

Redeveloping demolished or vacant properties.