AGENDA 6-04-2013
Printed From: MiddletownUSA.com
Category: Middletown City Government
Forum Name: City Council
Forum Description: Discuss individual members and council as a legislative body.
URL: http://www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5290
Printed Date: Nov 26 2024 at 6:08pm
Topic: AGENDA 6-04-2013
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Subject: AGENDA 6-04-2013
Date Posted: May 31 2013 at 6:07pm
|
MIDDLETOWN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA , June 4, 2013 1. MOMENT OF MEDITATION/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 2. ROLL CALL 3. CITIZEN COMMENTS 4. PRESENTATION-Armbruster Memorial Award-Ralph Connor 5. CITY MANAGER REPORTS • Employee of the Month • Council on Aging of Southwestern Ohio- 2012 Annual Report for the Butler County Elderly Services Program 6. CONSENT AGENDA. . . Matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion and one vote of consent. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed and considered separately. (a) Approve City Council Minutes: May 21, 2013 (b) Receive and File Board and Commission Minutes: Golf Course Commission – November 19, 2012 and March 4, 2013 Middletown Convention Visitors Bureau – February 28, and April 25, 2013 Historic Commission- April 25, 2013 Citizens Advisory Board- May 15, 2013 (c) Confirm Personnel Appointments:Bus Driver- Timothy Finney Part-time Bus Cleaner- Douglas Barker Corrections Officer- Kate Fryer (d) Receive and File Oath of Office:Benjamin Bultman 7. MOTION AGENDA (a) To authorize the sale of a nonproductive City owned lot at 606 Crawford Street for $500. 8. COUNCIL COMMENTS II. LEGISLATION 1. Resolution No. R2013-11, a resolution to adopt the revision of the Solid Waste District generation fee and amend Section VIII of the Solid Waste Management Plan of Butler County, Ohio and declaring an emergency.2. Resolution No. R2013-12, a resolution authorizing the transfer of monies in the Storm Water Fund to the Downtown Improvement Fund. (1st Reading)III. PUBLIC HEARING – MidPointe Library System – 2014 Budget Request IV. EXECUTIVE SESSION Under the authority of O.R.C. 121.22(G) (1) To consider the appointment, promotion or compensation of a city employee. |
Replies:
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: May 31 2013 at 6:58pm
|
RESOLUTION NO. R2013-12 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF MONIES IN THE STORM WATER FUND TO THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT FUND. WHEREAS , certain real property located at 1810 Manchester Avenue (Parcel #Q6532018000060) is owned by the City; and WHEREAS, said property was obtained as the result of expenditures from the Downtown Improvements Fund; and WHEREAS, the City was prepared to sell said property and place the proceeds of the sale in the Downtown Improvements Fund; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that said property may have value in complying with legal mandates for a Long Term Control Plan for storm water; and WHEREAS, if property were purchased by the City for purposes of complying with such legal mandates, the purchase would be funded in whole or in part from the Storm Water Fund; and WHEREAS, rather than sell the property at 1810 Manchester Avenue and purchasing property, it saves money to retain ownership of the 1810 Manchester Avenue property and require the Storm Water Fund to pay for the property to the Downtown Improvement Fund; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Middletown, Butler/Warren Counties, Ohio that: Section 1 City Council hereby approves the following transfer of funds to reflect the use of the property at 1810 Manchester Avenue for the legally mandated plan: $100,000.00 From the Storm Water Fund (Fund #515) To the Downtown Improvements Fund (Fund #481) Section 2 That this resolution shall take effect and be in force from and after the earliest period allowed by law. ____________________________________ Lawrence P. Mulligan, Jr., Mayor 1 st reading: June 4, 20132 nd reading:_____________________________ Adopted:______________________ Effective:______________________ Attest: _________________________ Clerk of the City Council H:/Law/Leg/2012 Leg/r Transfer Water Funds.doc S T A F F R E P O R T For the Business Meeting – June 4, 2013May 29, 2013 TO: Judith A. Gilleland, City Manager FROM: Preston M. Combs, Interim Public Works & Utilities Director PURPOSE To transfer funds from the Sewer Fund to the Downtown Fund for the old Office Outfitters property. BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS The City purchased the Office Outfitters property with Downtown Funds in an exchange of properties which brought the new UDF convenient store, fueling station downtown a few years ago. City staff was preparing to list the old Office Outfitters property for sale last month when we realized that this particular site has potential to partially reduce our combined sewer overflows as a part of the Long Term Control Plan (LTCP). The LTCP is currently being developed to present to USEPA this fall. FINANCIAL IMPACT The property is valued at $99,610. There are sufficient funds in the Stormwater Reserve Fund to cover the transfer of funds. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended to transfer $99,610 from the Stormwater Reserve Fund to the Downtown Fund and transfer control of the old Office Outfitters site at Charles Street and Manchester Avenue to Public Works for future stormwater retention. ALTERNATIVES The City could proceed with advertising the property for sale or hold the property as is. Purchase of Office Outfitters Property *Transfer of Funds* CONFORMITY TO CITY POLICY Yes EMERGENCY/NON-EMERGENCY Non-Emergency DEPARTMENTAL CLEARANCES Judy Gilleland, City Manager Michelle Greis, Director of Finance Leslie S. Landen, Director of Law Denise Hamet, Director of Economic Development Scott Tadych, Assistant City Engineer Betsy Parr, Clerk of City Council |
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: May 31 2013 at 7:13pm
|
I thought that this property was purchased from Duncan Oil (for $300,000+ with the old Clark station corner), so that Duncan could use the $$ to buy the property at the point of Central and Broad meeting University? The UDF property didn't have anything to do with this by my re-collection. The city already owns this vacant lot, so why the need for the fund transfer? What is going there? Remember---this was a rush purchase for "parking and a convenient store/laundromat/fueling station" adjacent to the rumored but not built train station for the state rail system between Cincy Dayton and Columbus. Am I wrong?
|
Posted By: LMAO
Date Posted: May 31 2013 at 7:28pm
|
Spider your absolutely right.Our "Spineless ones" and a few others in the City building has a hard time keeping up with there lies. My question to the "Spineless ones"is,If you can transfer monies from one account to another why can't you do the same to fix some of these crumbled roads here in the city?Hell with the downtown,dont you think you have or shall I say We have gave them enough? I'm still waiting on my free building.Please give me the Manchester so I can make it into Apartments for the Students that go to Cincy State.  ... |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 01 2013 at 5:14am
|
Spider - I thought that this property was purchased from Duncan Oil (for $300,000+ with the old The UDF property didn't have anything to do with this by my re-collection. The city already owns this vacant lot, so why the need for the fund transfer? What is going there? Am I wrong? |
Posted By: Libertarian
Date Posted: Jun 01 2013 at 9:22am
| Well said, Vivian. |
Posted By: over the hill
Date Posted: Jun 01 2013 at 9:58am
| Well,as you can see, the Mayor has already "blessed" this farce so "brother" will go along as well as "best buddy" Mort. Please don't let AJ and Josh along with Picard get sucked in to this shell game. Anita ,if you can ever stand up against the injustice here, NOW IS THE TME. |
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jun 01 2013 at 11:32am
|
The city ALREADY owns this property(paid $300,000 for it--remember?), so--WHY are they "selling" it to themselves? Why not just "gift it" like every other purchase lately? Obviously because(as Ms.Moon stated) this is a fund transfer sham to funnel more money FROM the storm sewer fund(AGAIN!!) into the starving beast black hole formerly known as our downtown. Maybe we can get a detailed explanation @ Council Tues. as to what this property(initially purchased for train station parking) has to do with sewers or storm water retention. I know of no extra drainage or sewer piping in that area. Also why we will never be able to fund adequate sewer repairs, since this fund has been constantly raided for ?ably related pet projects. I know a little about the history of this propty, since Duncan contacted me to see if I would take over the propsed(but abandoned) plan to build a fuel center/convenient stor/laundromat there. There rep stated that their business was selling fuel, not running retail operations. I politely declined that offer since in essence, I would have been competing with myself down the street. So-----when this water bill charge was created, I called it simply an un-mandated tax on the citizens. Mr.Marconi(then a commissioner) objected to my opinion, which has pretty much now played out exactly as I antcipated. The $$ has been shuffled to many un-related projects, and honestly has had little to nothing to contribute to sewers and storm water. I can't believe that everyone who signed off on this issue as being correct can look us in the eye and call it the truth. But they obviously can do just that. They really take us to either be that stupid and non-caring, or simply they don't care at all to stick this sham in our faces. Since it is going forward as a non-emergency, they already have the votes in line, and probably won't even discuss the issue. Pathetic
|
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 01 2013 at 3:52pm
|
Spider I read this legislation several times and it really doesn’t say anything. It’s a joke “the City has determined that said property may have value in complying with legal mandates for a Long Term Control Plan for storm water” The word may in this legislation gives City Hall a blank check, a way out later to save face for lying to the taxpayers about this transfer of $100,000. Don’t forget City Hall just raided the Wellhead Protection Fund of $600,000 and council didn’t even blink an eye as they all voted yes. Ms Judy just told us the other day that we will be over a million dollar short in revenues over each of the next several years….It is time for City Hall to put ALL these city owned properties up for sale to refill the coffers. What about the other properties that City Hall purchased down on WE ARE GOING BROKE! |
Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Jun 01 2013 at 5:34pm
|
When I read this story, I thought what does the old Office Outfitters location have to do with any sewer issues? Reading further down the list, my suspicions were confirmed by all of your comments. The legislation to move money out of the sewer fund to the downtown fund to put yet more money into the pipedreams of a select few in this town, doesn't surprise me. Been going on since at least the 80's when Becker and company slid money out of the street funds to place in their little project fund, which sees the most money pass through than any other fund. The General Fund seems to have money meant for other purposes pass through it on a regular basis also. Old Russy Carolus was a master at the peanut under the shell game as the city played it's "voodoo magic" with the people's money. You are right spider, it is pathetic.......these people, including the entire city council are wrong to go along with this. Why do they continue to be the blind sheep being lead around by the city administration? No fight in any of them. Gilleland and her people are really hurting this city with her mode of operation. She, along with her administration and the entire council need to go.....now. They only cater to the elite few. Mistake after mistake and no one to call them on it. We need people who demonstrate logic, prioritization abilities and competence. Those in leadership positions and who occupy the city building and those who sit behind the council desk don't seem to have a clue how to run a competent operation. Apparently Middletown is incapable of attracting leaders with enough skill to run a city correctly. This city has become a train wreck for sure. ------------- I'm so proud of my hometown and what it has become. Recall 'em all. Let's start over. |
Posted By: Bocephus
Date Posted: Jun 02 2013 at 11:43am
|
Government has gone crazy from local to national its like the whole country has lost its morals and no one cares any more. |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 03 2013 at 4:22am
|
Well maybe someone at City Hall can tell us why Ms Judy needs this money and on what project this $100,000 will be spent? |
Posted By: Richard Saunders
Date Posted: Jun 03 2013 at 7:20am
| If Ms. Giileland worried one-tenth as much about the general fund as she does about the downtown fund, perhaps we wouldn't be going broke. |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 03 2013 at 10:13am
|
If Ms. Giileland worried one-tenth as much about the general fund as she does about the downtown fund, perhaps we wouldn't be going broke.
Richard I agree....  |
Posted By: ktf1179
Date Posted: Jun 03 2013 at 10:53am
|
I say it is time we start to share this news on our Facebook pages. Maybe the more information we share on Facebook and social media on what is going on, we might start to get people more involved in this town. I mean look at what happened in Cincinnati with the Parking deal. |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 03 2013 at 10:53am
|
Richard Not only did City Hall rob Peter and Paul to get the 1.1 million dollar matching funds needed for the Ohio Moving Forward grant to demo 300 homes....but with each home that they demo they are loosing about $1,000 in property taxes....plus any delinquent taxes that were due on the property.
 |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 05 2013 at 10:19am
|
Thank you A.J. Smith for asking all the right question about the transfer of $100,000 from the Storm Water Fund to the Downtown Fund. Why on earth would you build a storm water retention pond on a $100,000 commercial zoned property with an 8 ft chain link fence around it? Talk about an eye soar to the surrounding business area….This entire discussion made my 3 little gray cells go TILT…TILT…TILT. Ms Judy was not happy with Mr. Smith because she wants more money in the Downtown Fund…period. This entire discussion had nothing to do with storm water. Just heard that Sam Ashworth’s step on, Scott Tadish, will be taking over Preston Combs’ position as head of Engineering Department. Then Mr. Mulligan brought up the fact that City Hall had purchased other properties with the Storm Water Fund. Well Mr. Mulligan this was yet another royal screw up story from City Hall. If you remember the City installed a storm water culvert in the wrong place and as a result the houses on each side were damaged with water and mold. Home owners were going to sue City Hall so City Hall purchased both houses for about $250,000 and then demoed the properties. Yep this was yet another $250,000….Down the Drain. And then the lady from Where is Ms Judy getting the money to demo this building? Could it be that she needs the above $100,000 to help pay for this demo job? |
Posted By: over the hill
Date Posted: Jun 06 2013 at 11:16am
| The lady also mentioned D.Adkins attempt to "bully" the Historical Society. Well, isn't this like the 3rd time we've heard about Dougie "bulling"? 1st the landlords then the homeowner now H.S. Dougie, cut back on the caffeine, you're out of control!! |
Posted By: Libertarian
Date Posted: Jun 06 2013 at 12:05pm
| It sounds like this power-hungry bureaucrat should be retitled Community Revitalization Prosecutor. His enormous ego doesn't tolerate differing opinions of the citizenry. Maybe there's a bit of insecurity behind his frequent displays of bravado? Perhaps he should consider riding the bull at the upcoming bovine event? |
Posted By: over the hill
Date Posted: Jun 06 2013 at 12:18pm
| Oh,it sounds like there's lots of insecurities,that's why he wants Ms.Judy's job then he can have more power instead of being her "lacky"IMO |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 06 2013 at 12:49pm
|
Over the Hill & Liberterian
I also believe that Mr. Doug is wanting Ms Judy's job and that increase in pay.
But we still haven't heard from HUD....so Mr Doug might be looking for another job very soon. I heard that HUD had a show & tell of Mr Doug at the City Council Meetings...they were not happy with his performance...oooops! |
Posted By: Bocephus
Date Posted: Jun 06 2013 at 1:25pm
|
if any one has facebook and you don't know about this Middletown page it has over 3,000 members and not many of them have a clue about whats going on but be gentle because the admins have been known to ban people =) and oh yea you have to click on the "join group" button and wait for acceptance. you are welcome https://www.facebook.com/groups/middletownmemories/" rel="nofollow - https://www.facebook.com/groups/middletownmemories/ |
Posted By: Libertarian
Date Posted: Jun 06 2013 at 1:27pm
|
Over The Hill - Perhaps the saddest thing about Mr. Akins are the laudatory comments that a handfull of MUSA contributors made about him for several years after Ginger Smith was "encouraged" to retire four years ago. Just look at some of the baseless statements that were made on his behalf. I hope that they are somewhat enlightened now. Vivian - Thanks for your updates about the HUD mess. The potential outcome may not be what Middletonians really want. Of course, Mr. Akins could apply for jobs in West Chester as he did a few years ago. Then, he wouldn't have to commute from Mason and could work there amidst wealthier neighbors.
|
Posted By: spiderjohn
Date Posted: Jun 06 2013 at 7:09pm
|
Very interesting HUD news We shall see just how effectively Mr.a has himself organized. I am not betting against him YET Remember--he didn't drag us into the HUD mess Happened long before his time, and he is trying to take us OUT of it I can see him being an effective city manager also He would definitely cut the crap and bull that has gone on for over 10years IMO I like the guy, and hope to stay on the right side of him He will listen and probably be more open than the current crew, and may take us away from the former downtown area lunacy expenditures Plus he would tear down the Rose building. Gotta love that + put the hysterical society in his place Remember--Marty works for him Jmo |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jun 06 2013 at 7:31pm
|
Spider, Finally Someone Who Understands What Mr A Has Been Through. As Well As The Fact That He Had Nothing To With Section 8 Mess In Middletown. It's About Time Someone Got It right. Pacman  |
Posted By: over the hill
Date Posted: Jun 06 2013 at 8:23pm
| There was nothing wrong with him trying to reduce the # of vouchers it was all in the way he was doing it,and evidentally,HUD didn't like the way he was doing it either,so they're going to take a closer look. |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jun 08 2013 at 3:47pm
|
Over The Hill, The fact that HUD did not like the way the city was reducing Section 8 Vouchers is of no interest to me and a significant number of Middletown residents. HUD to this date has provided no valid reason for not reducing the number of section 8 vouchers in the City of Middletown. Many on this site have no knowledge how the city acquired so many vouchers. The fact that the City Of Middletown has more vouchers per capita than the city of New York has should tell you something. |
Posted By: over the hill
Date Posted: Jun 08 2013 at 5:09pm
| Then there are many on this site that cannot read Ms. Moon has told that many many times on this site along with others that have knowledge of how they got here. |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 08 2013 at 5:21pm
|
Pacman - The fact that HUD did not like the way the city was reducing Section 8 Vouchers is of no interest to me and a significant number of Middletown residents. HUD to this date has provided no valid reason for not reducing the number of section 8 vouchers in the City of Middletown. |
Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Jun 09 2013 at 6:33pm
|
Vivian, You continue to share misinformation about the Cities intentions on reducing the number of S8 vouchers in Middletown. The City WILL NOT throw anyone out the currently has a S8 voucher. The City is going to reduce the vouchers by attrition. In others words, As the voucher is turned, it will not be reissued until it hits the specific goal the City intends to reach. HUD is just as much at fault as the City of Middletown Employees and Elected Officials for the large disproportionate number vouchers in Middletown by okaying the number of vouchers currently in use. Mr. Adkins, Ms. Gilleland, and current elected council had no hand in the current up of vouchers in Middletown. However, your friends at CONSOC and some current city employees did have a hand in this rapid increase in vouchers. Vivian, No One is being Hurt by the reduction of S8 Vouchers in Middletown. The worse that could happen is that the voucher program is shuffled off to Butler County. And the people who have vouchers in Middletown will continue to have vouchers in Middletown. Pacman |
Posted By: Libertarian
Date Posted: Jun 09 2013 at 6:53pm
|
Pacman - You have never once provided substantive and relevant documentation regarding community development issues. However, you are quick to condemn and malign people like Vivian. She has painstakingly obtained information from city hall sources that enlighten us. As for you, it's all conjecture. Your comments and criticisms are baseless. Have a good time slamming people who are really doing something to expose the truth and make local government accountable. You continuously shoot from the hip. It's time to unload your weapon.
|
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 10 2013 at 1:50am
Posted By: processor
Date Posted: Jun 10 2013 at 11:26am
|
Vivian, I don't know much about the history of section 8 in Middletown, but I do know that the huge number of vouchers in Middletown is very detrimental to the city and to the residents. Our cost has gone way up and the quality of life in Middletown has gone way down. I feel for the people who may not be getting the vouchers, but they need to go somewhere else and/or figure out a way to provide for themselves. The huge numbers of section 8 is a huge drag on the city directly and indirectly. The cost of police and schools are much higher than they would be without the section 8. Increased crime is a huge cost to victims. Major companies won't invest because the demographics (ie too many poor people) won't support their businesses and this reduces the amenities in Middletown which reduces the city's ability to attract new residents which reduces our property values which then continues the cycle. I not only applaud city council for trying to reduce the number of vouchers, but also am pushing them to take them to ZERO. I don't understand why you're concerned that the city follow HUD's direction. They don't live here. They don't have to put up with all of the negative impact and I'm not sure legally what they can do about the city reducing the vouchers. Regardless I'm glad that the city is doing what it can to reduce them. Let HUD sue us.
|
Posted By: ktf1179
Date Posted: Jun 10 2013 at 11:38am
|
Better yet, let's get our congressman John Boehner to call attention to this issue of cities having issues reducing Section 8 housing. |
Posted By: over the hill
Date Posted: Jun 10 2013 at 12:22pm
| Someone make the call to Boehner!!! |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 10 2013 at 12:29pm
|
Proscessor-Vivian, I don't know much about the history of section 8 in |
Posted By: Vivian Moon
Date Posted: Jun 10 2013 at 12:32pm
|
Over the Hill |
Posted By: Sports Mom
Date Posted: Jun 10 2013 at 3:44pm
| Processor, while I agree with everything you said it's not as easy as let HUD sue us. As Vivian stated before as a recipient of HUD monies, the City submits a plan to HUD as to what they will do with that money. If you don't follow the plan, they simply cut off your money. It's used for more than just Section 8 Housing and could do more harm than good to lose eligibility. Vouchers need to be reduced but not at the cost of all HUD programs. |
Posted By: processor
Date Posted: Jun 10 2013 at 4:32pm
|
Vivian, I don't understand what "rights" landlords and tenant have. Rights are constitutionally given. Rights are not a matter of law. There is nothing constitutional about the HUD mess. They don't have rights to federally subsidized rent. Just because landlords have figured out how to suck money from the public tit, as have the section 8 tenants and just because it would financially hurt them if the program were cut off, doesn't mean they have "rights" Sports Mom, I agree that HUD could retaliate and cut off some funding, and probably would. I don't agree that it would hurt Middletown to lose this money. It may actually help. I can't see where any of the city building purchases have amounted to a help for the citizens of Middletown. In spite of their best of intentions I can't see where city leaders can invest money better than private individuals. What value have the citizens received from all of the purchases, etc? I can't think of any but may be missing some good that has come out of the HUD money. I just don't see where "investments" that are determined by a political process come out good. Not because of the people involved...many really do care...the process just doesn't support good decisions when it comes to investment. IMO
|
Posted By: TonyB
Date Posted: Jun 10 2013 at 4:59pm
|
Processor, How do you come up with the idea that removing money from the local economy would be good for the city? What possesses you to decide that the poor should leave and "figure something out" to support themselves? Are you an employer? A moving company? Should we just give all the Sec. 8 families a one-way bus ticket? Your lack of compassion and understanding isn't really a surprise but I do wonder where you come up with this kind of logic. Having said that, I agree that the city should never have accepted all those vouchers. However, what is done is done. The city needs to work with HUD to reduce the number of vouchers through attrition. A lawsuit would only drain more money from the city fighting a battle they are destined to lose. Middletown isn't getting out of the current death spiral until they can bring living wage jobs to the city. Until that happens, poverty and crime will continue and once those Sec. 8 vouchers are finally reduced, you won't have that excuse to use for why Middletown is in decline. |
Posted By: processor
Date Posted: Jun 10 2013 at 5:31pm
|
Tony, I admire your compassion, however, I'm convinced that section 8 is a huge detriment to Middletown and until it is removed Middletown will never stand a chance of improving to any great degree. I feel badly for the poor and the section 8 people but the good people of Middletown can only support so many people until their lives are so negatively impacted that they are no longer able to help. Then everyone is worse off. In addition helping people to learn to help themselves is a wonderful thing that I try to do daily, however, creating a dependent class of people causes harm to all. Section 8 has, unfortunately, become a way of life for too many people. Regarding removing money from the local economy, money spent unwisely or on the wrong things can cause more long term harm than not spending it in the first place. More money does not always equal increased prosperity. Middletown is a prime example. Please show me where all of the Federal money spent in Middletown has kept us where we were in the 70's or 80's. For example, did the downtown mall prevent the downtown from failing? That was a lot of Federal money. I'm sure it helped short term, but long term I think that it left us worse off that if the downtown merchants had been forced to re-define themselves when they were still reasonable financially strong. I'm sure that the members of this board can think of hundreds of additional examples where Federal money helped short term, but left us worse in the long term.
|
Posted By: TonyB
Date Posted: Jun 11 2013 at 7:21am
|
Processor, The fact that the money the federal government gave to Middletown was spent poorly wasn't the fault of the Feds but the city. Poor plans and even poorer execution doomed the downtown mall and Lake Middletown. The fault here wasn't the money spent but how it was spent. No amount of money would have prevented the slide of prosperity in Middletown that wasn't associated with bring jobs to the city. Armco was the one-trick pony in town and when their employment started to decline and they moved their corporate headquarters out of town, the city started to decline as well. I do hate to break this to you but we are all dependent. It's a complete fallacy to think that you are self sufficient when you don't grow your own food, produce your own electricity and supply your own water. The good people of Middletown do not support removing all Section 8 housing but there is no question that Section 8 is out of balance with the rest of the county, the state and the nation as a whole. There won't be a significant increase in the welfare of Middletown until living wage jobs are brought to town in large numbers. |
Posted By: Libertarian
Date Posted: Jun 11 2013 at 9:09am
| Please remember what VietVet always says: "Our first priority should have been and is to bring good jobs here." He speaks the plain and simple truth. |
Posted By: processor
Date Posted: Jun 11 2013 at 11:16am
|
Tony, I agree with you, and Libertarian, that what Middletown needs is a huge increase in high paying jobs. However, I believe that the huge numbers of section 8 and housing projects and the resulting poor demographics and lack of amenities and low performing schools greatly reduce the chance of Middletown attracting employers that would offer these sorts of positions. That until these underlying issues are addressed and solved there won't be improvement in the job opportunities just further degradation. Regarding the Federal money and how poorly it was spent, you've just made my point about the political process not being able to effectively spend our tax dollars especially when it comes to economic development. If you can't spend the money effectively why wouldn't you leave it in private individual's hands and let them spend it as they see fit. Regarding ARMCO, didn't they leave well after Middletown's slide? I think they left as a result of the slide and weren't the cause of the slide though them leaving certainly didn't help.
|
Posted By: over the hill
Date Posted: Jun 11 2013 at 12:18pm
| The AK workers were locked out for a year.I think that was a huge blow to Middletown economy then the economy nationally took a nose dive and Midd was never able to recover then a new admin came in with bad policies for Midd. Dayton was hit hard too and that effected Midd too then AK moved it's head quarters out of Midd. Midd will never be the same work force it was before. The work force of the future is service and tech areas,that's the jobs that will be needed so the work force needs to educate themselves in those areas.IMO |