My Top Concerns
1.
According to information presented to Moody’s Investment (to see the entire report click here), the city has
identified as a new source of income a garbage collection fee which
is designed to bring in between $1 million and $1.2 million annually.
How many more sources of income does this present administration propose
to burden the citizens with? This will come after a 33% increase in
the income tax in 2005, a near doubling of the road levy in 2010, and an
attempted repeal of the ¾% income tax credit in 2010.
2.
What should be done with the 2005 purchase of
property on Greenvale? The city
currently has $1.8 million invested, no principal payments have been made,
annual interest payments average $50,000.
We have 9 empty lots that are not contiguous. How do we pay off this debt? What should be done with this property?
3.
What is going to happen with Cedar Center? This property was purchased in 2004 for $16.3
million dollars; an additional $2 million was spent on demolition. At present, no definite price has been set
for the sale of this property to the developer.
Why? When? For how much?
4.
Our roads are in dismal shape and the promise of
spending significant amounts of the 2005 ½ % income tax increase on road repair
seems to have vanished.
5.
The playground of possibilities was constructed
at a cost of over $225,000. This was
originally presented as a project that would be done with 100% volunteer labor
and 100% donations. Since donations were
not sufficient to fund the project, the city “loaned” the balance. As of current, the city is still owed about
$44,000.
6.
The current administration does not seem to
represent the interests of the people.
Since 2005, voters have started 5 initiatives to overturn actions
endorsed by this administration.
·
2008 – Point of sale was defeated by the
voters, 63 – 37%
·
2010 – ¾% tax credit rollback was enacted the
day after the road repair levy passed in
an emergency session of council.
Petitioners gathered enough signatures in both a referendum to overturn
the rollback. Council subsequently
reversed its earlier decision before allowing this to proceed to the ballot..
·
2011 – The rezoning of Oakwood was challenged by
voters. The city attempted to deny their
right to present the issue on the ballot and was subsequently overturned by the
Ohio Supreme Court. Further, the city is
now responsible for all legal fees of both parties of this dispute.
·
2011 – Citizens are bringing the issue of speed
cameras to the voters as a charter amendment.
This is being done because previously, the administration found a
technicality to deny this going to a vote challenging just the legislation.
·
2011 – The question of shall we have garage
floor slab inspections was denied going to a vote of the people based on the
wrong form being used to gather signatures.
Input needed
